yet Baptism an Ordinance of the Souls Marriage with Christ and is not that as Mr. Baxter saith a strange Marriage where there is nothing signified of consent and are Infants able so to do 12. Can Infant Baptism be more useful then that of Believers and yet Baptism call'd the Answer of a good Conscience Can a little Babe answer a good Conscience by being baptized in Obedience to Christ and to shew forth his Death and Resurrection 13. Can Infant Baptism be more useful then that of Believers Whereas the first has no promise of God made unto it and yet the other hath many as Acts 2. 36 37 38. Mark 16. 16. 14. Can that be an useful thing that frustrates the Sacred and Spiritual ends of Baptism which we have shewed are many but as administred to poor Babes 't is rendred wholly of none effect and an insignificant thing Mr. Perkins hints that Baptism signifies two things 1 our Union with Christ 2 our Communion with him now how does this appear in Infants as such as it does in Believers Perkins on Gal. p. 265. 16. Is not that an absurd Doctrine and Practice that renders the fruitful Womb of a godly Woman more advantageous to increase the Church of Christ then a fruitful Gospel 17. Is it not a very absurd thing to say that Abraham could by his Money purchase and bring Strangers and proselyted Gentiles into the Covenant of Grace and if Abraham could buy them and bring them into the Covenant of Grace with Silver and Gold what need was there of Jesus Christ to buy or purchase them with his own Blood 18. Is not that an absurd Doctrine and Practice that holds forth that godly Parents have power to bring in their Children into the Covenant of Grace or keep them out of it for if you by baptizing them do not bring them into the Covenant of Grace but you do believe they were in the said Covenant by being born of Believers by being begotten by you according to the Flesh then it will follow if we are Believers our Children are in as good a Condition as yours though they were never baptized CHAP. XXII Answer to Mr. James Owen's 18th Chapter wherein be sheweth the Duty of Parents to their Children proving in opposition to what he says that Parents ought not to consecrate their Infants to the Lord by Baptism YOu say if Parents would perform their Duties towards their Children and how to make a right use of their Baptism there would be more Godliness and Sobriety in the Country and few would be the number of them that deny their Baptism c. Answ If Parents did generally take more care of their Childrens Souls and instruct them in the Principles of the Christian Religion then they do no doubt Sobriety and Godliness would more abound then now it doth every where 2. But as to the right use of their Baptism you your Selves cannot tell what use that can be to them because 't is not appointed of God 3. Did Parents instruct their Children according to the word of God viz. to believe and get Union with Christ and not baptize them till they desired it according to the Scripture Infant Baptism would soon vanquish 1. You say look to your own right in the Covenant of God if God is not a God to you he is not a God to your Seed c. 1. Answ Suppose then that some of those Parents whose Children you baptize should not be in Covenant with God what right had their Children to Baptism is not that Baptism a nullity it was not thus in the case of Circumcision if the Parents were Abraham's natural Seed whether Godly or wicked they were to Circumcise their Male Children 2. Though 't is true an adult Person hath no right to Baptism that is not a true believer yet if he profess Faith in Christ and a Minister not knowing his Heart but sees no cause to doubt of the reality or truth of his Faith he may baptize such but you have no Warrant to baptize a Child upon the profession of its Parents Faith tho' his Faith be sincere 2. When they are Born prepare to Present and Consecrate them say you to the Lord through the Sacred Ordinance of Baptism there are many that baptize all their Children as matter of Ceremony and meer Custom without looking to the Lord c. Answ By whose Authority must they thus do viz. As soon as their Children are Born Consecrate them to the Lord. 'T is not by the Authority of God's Word therefore a piece of Will Worship Parents would do well to pray over their Babes as soon as they are Born but unless required by Christ to baptize them they must not do that 2. Whoever therefore Baptize their Infants do it only as a Ceremony divised by Man tho' not in their intention their Consciences being missed You ought say you to be serious about their Baptism as we should be about our own baptism that which the Child ought to do if he had been at Age and Understanding must be done by you for them even as Mothers when their Children be Sick take Physick themselves which the Children ought to take so that the Child may have the Medicine in his Mothers Milk even so do ye that which the Child ought to do if he had been of Age before Baptised 1. Answ Some of the Papists are very serious about their divised Ceremonies but this makes it in no wise the more acceptable to God But 2. Do you not here seemingly acknowledge 't is the Duty of the Child when 't is at Age to be baptized but you would have its Parents do it for the Child but how do you prove that God will accept that at the Hands of the Parent which the Child ought to do when at Age. I have shewed you that in an early Council they would not allow a Woman big with Child to be Baptized least it should be thought the Child was baptized with the Mother 3. Doth the Mothers Faith and Holiness avail and profit their Childs Soul as her Milk may avail and profit the Body of her Child what kind of Doctrine is this but it may be so if what you said before be true i. e. that the Child is part of the Patent 3. Bless the Lord for the Covenant of Grace say you and for Christ the Mediator of the Covenant and for Baptism the Seal of that Covenant Is the extent of the Covenant a small thing in thy sight that the living God bindeth himself to thee and thy sinful Seed Is it a small thing that he should pitty them when they were polluted in their blood that he washed them and entred into a Covenant with them Ezek. 16. 5. 6. 1. Answ We have all cause to bless the Lord for the Covenant of Grace and for Christ the Mediator both in respect of our selves and for our Children but you affirm ' that which you cannot prove viz. that baptism is
external Privileges of the Covenant of Grace who only partake of Baptism and not of the Lord's-Supper Is not Faith required of all such that ought to be baptized as well as it iâ— required in all that partake of the Lord's Supper to examine themselves neither of which Infants are capable to do It iâ— manifest that the Children of the Faithful as such are not in the Covenant of Grace God made with Abraham but that there was a twofold Covenant made with him and that the Covenant of Grace only appertains to the Elect of God whether they be Children of Believers or Children of Unbelieverâ— which is not known to us until they are grown up and are brought by the Spirit of God under special Vocation and Regeneration and that they are the Adult only viz. such as believe that have right to Baptism but that not by virtue of the Covenant of Grace but by virtue of the positive Command of Christ in the New Testament Sir you mistake again it was not by virtue of the Covenant of Grace that Persons had right to Circumcision for if so then Lot and Melchisedec and Abraham's Males as soon as they were born had a right to it as also his Females nothing gave right to Abraham's Male-Infanâ—s to Circumcision but the meer positive Command of God to him which extended only to those Males in his own House or bought with his Money and not till the eighth day for such that died before the eighth day tho Males had no right to be circumcised nor had his Females any right thereto so none but Believers when they can give an account of their Faith by virtue of Christ's express and positive Command ought to be baptized Pray remember the Covenant of Grace as such gives no right to Baptism for if it did all Believers or Elect Persons had right to it from the first Introduction or Declaration of it to Adam upon the Fall No no it is a pure Gospel-Ordinance and meerly positive and only depends upon the Will and Pleasure of the Law-giver Jesus Christ Honoured Britains who inhabit North and South Wales let me intreat you to consider how false the Conclusion is that Mr. Owen draws concerning the Right the Infants of the Faithful have to Baptism namely that if they are in the Covenant of Grace then they ought to be baptized For as he nor no Man else can prove the Infants of Believers as such are in the Covenant of Grace so it would not follow were that granted that they ought to be baptized it being not the Covenant of Grace but the express and positive Command of Christ that gives Persons just Right thereunto Suppose Christ had not commanded Believers to be baptized would any Man have adventured to baptize them or conclude it was their Duty because they were in Covenant with God Or would Abraham have been circumcised himself because in the Covenant of Grace had he not received a positive Command so to be Certainly he was long in the Covenant of Grace before he was circumcised and did not sin thereby because God had not given that Precept to him until he was old Moreover it was the express Command of God that gave right to his Male-Infants to be circumcised and not only those of his Seed that were in the Covenant of Grace but Ishmael and others who were not Children of the Promise or in the Covenant of Grace were circumcised and also it was not Lot's Duty tho in the Covenant of Grace to be circumcised because not one that dwelt in Abraham's Family or his Natural Seed nor commanded by the Lord to be circumcised or to circumcise his Infants CHAP. VII Proving Infant-Baptism is not lawful because Circumcision under the Law belonged unto the Male-Infants of the Jews containing an Answer to Mr. James Owen's first Chapter IF say you Circumcision under the Law belonged unto Infants then Baptism under the Gospel belongeth unto them for even as Circumcision was so Baptism is the Seal of the same Covenant of Grace and signifieth the same things Answ 1. I answer If Circumcision did not belong to Infants under the Law any otherwise than by express and positive Command of God which gave them right thereto then if God hath not commanded Believers to baptize their Infants it is not their Duty to baptize them but their Sin if they do it But I have proved it was the express Command of God only that gave Male-Infants proceeding from Abraham's Loâ—â—s Authority to be circumcised and God hath given no such Command to Believers to baptize their Infants therefore Baptism doth not belong to the Infants of Believers as such under the Gospel as Circumcision did belong to Male-Infants under the Law 2. I have proved Circumcision was not the Seal of the Covenant of Grace tho it was a Seal to Abraham of the Righteousness of his own Faith yea of that Faith he had being not circumcised A Seal I have shewed gives an undoubted Right of all those Blessings and Privileges to those Persons to whom the said Covenant is sealed and so it did to Abraham but it was no Seal of the Blessings of the Covenant of Grace to Ishmael Esau and many thousands more who were commanded to be circumcised Were this therefore true that Mr. Owen asserts That Circumcision was a Seal of the Covenant of Grace to all that were circumcised in Infancy then they were all saved even all the Males that proceeded from Abraham's Loins many of which proved as vile and wicked Men as most that ever lived in the World Nor Reader is Baptism a Seal of the Covenant of Grace under the Gospel for if so it would seal all Gospel-Blessings to all Persons that are baptized who then were it so but would be baptized and baptize his Children Brethren the holy Spirit only is the Seal of the Covenant of Grace or Gospel-Covenant vid. Ephes 1 13 14. cap. 4. 10. You proceed to shew in several respects that Circumcision and Baptism signify the same things 1. You say because Original Corruption cometh by Natural Generation 2. Because we are born in Uncleanness we must be washed in our Infancy Answ 1. Supposing that Circumcision did and Baptism doth signify the Corruption or Filthiness of Original Sin or Uncleanness must we therefore baptize our Infants without any Authority Command or Example in God's Word 2. Doth Baptism wash away Original Corruption I know the Papists assert it doth do this but how do they or you prove it Baptism St. Peter saith doth not wash away the Filthiness of the Flesh or Corruption of Natural Pollution 1 Pet. 3. 21. 3. Your Reverend Brother Mr. Stephen Charnock fully proves that Baptism is not Regeneration that can't cleanse from Sin Answer his Arguments in his Book of Regeneration What tho those Baptists in Germany you speak of understood that the antient erring Fathers that introduced Infant-Baptism did bring it in to wash away Original Sin Cannot Christ cleanse Elect
sure when Zacheus believed in Christ he was a proper Subject of Gospel Baptism so were all that believed who were in his House but the Text doth not say that every particular Person that were in his House believed or that Salvation came so to his House but if it did no doubt they were all upon their believing baptized 2. But you may well say what is this to Baptism since he and all his House were baptized before even when he was in his Sins and a notorious Sinner the chief of the Publicans it is probable say you sure Sir 't is more then probable it was impossible that Zacheus and his Family should escape Baptism when John had baptized all the whole Country before all yea every individual Person that dwelt in Jerusalem Judea and all the Regions round about The truth is this is very impertinently brought in to prove Infant Baptism what doth it signifie that Salvation was come to Zacheus that day and not until then seeing John's Commission was to baptize all whether Godly or Ungodly Believers or Unbelievers whether Salvation was come to them or not let the Reader observe what darkness and ignorance this Man shews Peter say you when he first planted the Christian Religion among the Jews exhorted them saying be baptized every one of you for the promise is to you and to your Children Ans This of the promise being unto them and to their Children we have fully already answered but why doth Peter command these Jews who doubtless dwelt at Jerusalem to be baptized seeing John Baptist had baptized them and their Children before as you have positively asserted what must they be all rebaptized what inconsistency is there in your arguing 2. The latitude of this Command be baptized every one of you is no further then to all them that he commands to repent nor is the promise to any of their Children but such that the Lord our God shall all the Parents right and interest to the promise of the Holy Spirit Remission of Sins and eternal Life spring from their Interest in Christ by Faith and at that Door comes in the right and interest of all their Children or Off-spring that are called by the effectual operations of the word and spirit of God 't is the promise made to all the true spiritual Seed of Abraham but are the natural Seed of Abraham and the natural Seed of Believers as such or as so considered the spiritual Seed of Abraham 3. the promise here meant and the duty of being baptized are as you say of the same Latitude thus you argue viz. be baptized you and your Children for the promise is unto you and to your Children we so are to understand the Words the Promise and the Duty being of the same Latitude if the Promise belongeth unto them and their Children then bapâ—â—â—â—â— Ans I answer what is the promise but the Holy-Ghost and eternal Life and such that receive this Promise viz. the holy Spirit as an earnest of eternal Life we deny not are to be baptized and if no Child hath any other right to the Duty but such who have received the same Promise through Faith ziz remission of Sin and of the Holy Spirit then no Children but such that repent and believe ought to be baptized seeing the Promise and Duty runs to the Children or Off-spring as it runs to the Parents In the same manner you say when Peter planted the first Church among the Gentiles as might be gathered from the words of the Angel to Cornelius being the first Fruits of the Church of the Gentiles Acts 11. 13. send Men to Joppa and call for Simon whose Sir-name is Peter who shall tell thee words whereby thou and all thy House shall be saved the Gospel bringeth Salvation to him and to all his House Cornelius well knew the meaning of the Words for he being a proselite to the true Religion before that time though uncircumcised yet received the severe Commandment of Noah the substance of which might be seen Gen. 9. 1. God's Covenant was with Noah and his Seed c. 1. Ans I answer 't is said Peter should tell Cornelius words whereby he and all his House shall be saved but it must be such of his House that could hear and understand those Words Peter should tell them he shall tell thee and tell all thy House Words whereby you shall be saved but not unless he and they of his House believed and pray observe is it not said he was a devout Man and one that feared God with all his House Acts 10. 2. all his House the Holy-Ghost here intends were such who were of understanding and did fear God as well as himself also Cornelius said to Peter now we are all here to hear what things are commanded thee of God all his House were capable to hear c. Moreover is it not said while Peter yet spake these words the Holy Ghost fell on them which heard the word Verse 44. and all these were commanded to be baptized viz. that had received the Holy-Ghost for their reception of the Holy-Ghost is that argument the Apostle uses to command them to be baptized Verse 47 can any Man forbid water that those should not be baptized which have received the Holy-Ghost as well as we and he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord Verse 48 them that did believe them that had received the Holy-Ghost them that spake with Tongues and magnified God and if it was every individual Person in his House let it be so the greater Grace of God was manifested but here are no Children mentioned in Infancy that were baptized 2. Besides I wonder at you 't is said Peter should tell Cornelius words whereby he and all his House should be 〈◊〉 sure you do not believe what you seem to plead for pray answer when the Parent believes and is saved or assured of Salvation are all his Children and whole Family by his Faith brought into the like stars of Salvation shall they all be saved also Through his Faith the external Priviledges of the Covenant that your Brethren talk of that is something but I know not what by virtue of their Parents Faith it is not however that which you plead for you tell us when Cornelius heard words whereby he came to be saved all his Family through his Faith were saved also if you do not this I profess I know not what you mean by what you have written but if this be your meaning I hope no Body will believe you because all know it is utterly false 3. But the greater wonder comes at last viz. it appears Cornelius and his Houshold because a Gentile had right to Baptism by the Covenant and Commandment of God to Noah not by virtue of Abraham's Covenant the Truth is one is as good an Argument for Baptism as the other but was the Covenant God made with Noah the Covenant of Grace if it was all the
nor in Baptism but by Faith only Therefore when our Children are called of God or do believe in Christ they have right to the Inheritance which Baptism is a sign of and what signifies the sign without the thing signified You our Brethren the Pedo-baptists give your Children the Name but not the Nature of Christ what is the lofty Title of Earl or Duke and no Estate suteable to that fancy'd Honour Mr. Owen saith We are Stewards over the House of God and we ought to protect the Feeble and Afflicted we are Shepherds and our duty is to provide for the Lambs of the Flock lest any cast them out of the Fold Reply It is required in Stewards that they be Faithful and to see that they give no portion of their Masters Goods to any but to such he hath directed and commanded them so to do Now Christ hath commanded his Stewards or Ministers no more to give Infants the Holy Ordinance of Baptism than the Lord's Supper He therefore that doth it let him answer it when our Lord comes 2. Are our Infants Lambs in Christ's Fold or feeble and afflicted Christians in Christ's Spiritual Family Infants are committed to Ministers care who are Natural Fathers but not as Ministers God never made his Ministers Stewards to take care of and to be Nurses of little Infants True â—ew born Babes in Christ or Babes in Grace they are to provide for and take the care of those Lambs they must see not cast out of Christ's Fold when they are received in by Baptism c. VVe are Builders saith he and we ought to build the VValls of Jerusalem working with one Hand in the VVork and with the other holding a VVeapon Neh. 4. 17. And we must not reject those small or little Stones which the Father received into the old Building whom the Son received into the new Building and will be received by the Holy Ghost Mat. 19. Luke 1. 44. who maketh them lively Stones of Jerusalem that is Above and these Stones by some are cast into an unclean place without the City Levit. 14. 40. God doth raise up Children unto Abraham See Mat. 3. 9. Reply Because the old Jerusalem by God's appointment was built with dead Stones which was a Type of the New will he without Christ's Authority build his New and Spiritual Jerusalem with such Materials We deny not but that God did receive Infants as such into his old Building But doth not St. Peter tell us the Gospel-Temple is built up with Spiritual Stones lively or living Stones i. e. Men and VVomen spiritually quickned by Divine Grace or renewed by the Holy Spirit Let him prove if he can that Christ received into the Gospel-Church any one Infant and tho we deny not but elect Infants that die may be lively Stones in Jerusalem Above I mean Heaven yet it follows no more from thence that Infants ought to be baptized than that they ought to partake of the Lord's Supper Moreover evident it is that John in Mat. 3. 9. the Text Mr. Owen quotes doth deny such to have a right to Baptism that were the Seed or Children of Abraham according to the Flesh Think not to say within your selves we have Abraham to our Father The Covenant of Peculiarity God made with Abraham tho it gave right to his Male-Infants to Circumcision yet it gives no right to Gospel-Baptism to any either Young or Old Male nor Female God can raise up of Stones Children to Abraham i. e. such that have no Descent from Abraham So that it appears Fleshly Descent in Gospel Times signifies not any thing as to Gospel-Church-Membership Worthy Britains Search the Scriptures and be not mistaken about the Covenant God made with Abraham you will find the Covenant of Grace was one and the same from the beginning and it was always held forth by way of a Free Promise first to Adam and so to Abraham c. but there was a Covenant made with Noah and tho it was full of Mercy to him and all Mankind yet that was not simply in it self the Covenant of Grace So also there was a Covenant made with Abraham and his Natural Seed as such which we call a Covenant of Peculiarity or which peculiarly did appertain to his Natural Seed or Off-spring to which Covenant Circumcision did belong which was distinct to the Free Promise or Covenant of Grace which God made with him and with all the Elect in him You may assure your selves that that Covenant in which there was mutual Restipulation between God and Abraham and his Carnal Seed or between God and the whole House of Israel and upon the Condition of Obedience thereunto Life length of Days and the Earthly Canaan was promised and upon their Disobedience Temporal Death was threatned was not the Covenant of Grace tho it might be given in subserviency to the Gospel-Covenant or the Covenant of Faith And so it was as a School-master to bring them to Christ 'T is only the Holy Spirit thro Faith that actually intiles us or our Children to the Covenant of Grace We must believe and our Children must believe before either we or they can be actually in this Blessed Covenant so as to have right to Baptism I mean such of them that live c. Also know as I said before that it is not the Covenant of Grace simply considered in it self that gives any Person a right to Gospel-Baptism but the meer positive and express Command Will and Pleasure of Christ the only Lawgiver For the Covenant of Grace gave no Godly Man or his Male-Children in Abraham's Time or before or after any right to Circumcision but only God's Command to Abraham which ran to those that proceeded from Abraham's Loins or were bought with his Money Brethren Can any think that Abraham could purchase Men with Money and that way bring them into the Covenant of Grace No 't is nothing but the Purchase of Christ's Blood can do that In a word it is evident that should we grant all that Mr. Owen and other Pedo-Baptists say That all the Children of Believers were in very deed in the Covenant of Grace yet it would not follow from thence that our Infants should be baptized any more than that they ought to have the Lord's Supper given to them as I said before because both those Ordinances as Circumcision was are absolutely of meer positive Right Therefore we must know that 't is the Will and Command of Christ in the New Testament that Infants ought to be baptized if they have right thereunto but since there is not the least Intimation given in all God's Word that 't is his Pleasure they should be baptized it must be a piece of Will-worship to do it Object But whereas 't is objected it may be gathered from Consequences that 't is our Duty to baptize them I answer In point of instituted Worship or for any meer positive Legal or Gospel Ordinance there ought to be an express Precept
this Book Chap. 5. p. 41. Thirdly Baptism is Dipping according to the purport of those Typical Baptisms spoken of in the Scripture Authors that assert this Sir Norton Knatchbull see the quotations before cited upon this account in this Book p. 43. Pool's Annotations on 1 Cor. 10. 1 2 3. Thomas Aquinas as quoted by Dr. Du Veil cited here p. 35. Fourthly Baptism is Dipping of the whole Body in Water according to the purport of those Metaphorical Baptisms spoken of in the Scripture Authors that assert this mentioned in this Treatise Casaubon as quoted by Dr. Du Veil on Act. 1. 5. p. 10. cited in this Treatise p. 44. Oecumenius on Act. 2. cited here p. 44. Vossius Pool's Annotations on Matth. 20. 22. both cited in this Book p. 44. In Chapter 8. concerning Christ's Commission two Authors are mentioned p. 97 98. Mr. Perkins on Gal. Vol. 2. Chap. 3. p. 25. Mr. Baxter ' s Right of Baptism p. 149 150. In Chap. 9. p. 119 c. You have an account of the Authors who Assert that the Holiness mentioned 1 Cor. 7. 14. is Matrimonial Holiness Jerom. Chameri Sect. 50. Sic Ambrosius Thomas Anselmus Suarez Melancthon in his Commentary upon this place of Scripture viz. 1. Cor. 7. 14. Camerarius Musculus in his Comment on 1 Cor. 7. 14. Camera Erasmus upon the place viz. 1 Cor. 7. 14. THE TABLE OF THE CHIEF HEADS CHAP. I. REmarks on Mr. Owen's first Chapter sâ—ewing his abuse of the Text Heb. 9. 19 opening the proper Signification of the Greek word Baptizo Page 1. to 5 CHAP. II. Mr. Owen's Argument for the Continuation of Baptism turned against his Insant Baptism Page 5. to 9 CHAP. III. Proving Baptism is Immersion or Baptizing is Dipping from the proper signification of the Greek word Page 9. to 16 CHAP. IV. Proving Baptizing is Dipping from the Practice of John Baptist Christ and his Apostles Page 17. to 20 CHAP. V. Proving Baptizing is dipping the whole Body in Water from the signification of Baptism Page 20 to 44 CHAP. VI. Mr Owen's Argument for Infant Baptism from the Covenant God made with Abraham answered Page 45. to 79 CHAP. VII Mr. Owen's Arguments to prove Infant Baptism from Circumcision answered Page 80. to 96 CHAP. VIII Mr. Owen's Argument taken from Christ's Commission Matth. 28. 19 20. answered Page 96. to 108 CHAP. IX Proving the holiness spoken 1 Cor. 7. 14. Else were your children unclean but now they are holy is not Federal or Spiritual holiness but the holiness of Legitimative or Matrimonial holiness Page 109. to 125 CHAP. X. Opening the purport of that Text of Christ's Blessing little Children in answer to Mr. Owen's Argument taken from thence for Infant Baptism Page 125. to 134 CHAP. XI Opening the nature of that holiness Rom. 11. 16. If the root be holy so are the branches and Mr. Owen's Argument for Infant Baptism from thence answered Page 134. to 147 CHAP. XII In answer to Mr. Owen's 10th Chapter and his Argument that Children can partake of those things prefigured in Baptism Page 147. to 154 CHAP. XIII In answer to Mr. Owen's Arguments for Infant Baptism from those Tipical Baptisms under the Law or Old Testament Page 154. to 170 CHAP. XIV In answer to Mr. Owen's Argument for Infant Baptism from John Baptist's Baptizing all the people of the Jews as he asserteth Page 171. to 188 CHAP. XVI In answer to Mr. Owen's 13th Chap. concerning those whole housholds said to be Baptized in the New Testament P. 189. to 213 CHAP. XVII In answer to Mr. Owen's 14th Chapter about the Baptism of Infants in the first Centuries after the Apostles proving no Infants Baptized in the two first Centuries Page 214. to 227 CHAP. XVIII Proving Infant Baptism no excellent way to Plant the Christian Religion in answer to Mr. Owen's 15th Chapter shewing it was only contrived to uphold National Churches and so a sinful practice Page 228. to 239 CHAP. XIX In which those Objections Mr. Owen mentioned against Infant Baptism as brought by us are considered with a Reply to his Answers Page 234. to 237 CHAP. XX. In answer to Mr. Owen's Slanders and Reproaches cast upon the Antipedobaptists proving Dipping Believers in Christ's name does not render us guilty of Murther and Adultery and Infant Baptism further proved a very sinful practice P. 238. to 262 CHAP. XXI Shewing that there is no Blessing to be expected in Infant Baptism with an answer to Mr. Burket and Mr. Daniel Williams in his Book called Vanity of Youth P. 263. to 276 CHAP. XXII In Answer to Mr. James Owen's 18th Chapter wherein he sheweth the Duty of Parents to their Children proving in opposition to what he says that Parents ought not to consecrate their Infants to the Lord by Baptism Page 276 to 280 CHAP. XXIII In answer to Mr. James Owen's 19th Chapter wherein he gives advice to Children with an answer to his Queries that he would have the Anti-pedobaptists to reply unto Page 280 to 293 CHAP. XXIV Containing some practical Use of the whole Treatise with seasonable Counsel to Parents Page 293 to 298 CHAP. XXV Containing several Queries for Mr. James Owen to answer Page 298 to 305 CHAP. XXVI Containing divers Arguments to disprove Pedo-baptism and to prove the Baptism of Believers which Mr. Owen is desired to answer when he writes again Page 305 to the end By reason this Treatise was printed at several Presses the Author could not attend them whereby many Faults have escaped and Mispointings which spoils the Sense ERRATA PAge 7. Line 27. add in all that live P. 12. l. 23. for of way read way of P. 13. l. 26. for pag. 5 6 7. read pag. 75 76 27. being Citations out of Dr. Du Veil P. 16. l. 5. for John read Matthew P. 34. l. 10. for and read but. P. 31. l. 3. for almost all read many P. 45. Chap. 5. read Chap. 6. P 46. l. 37. read his Natural Seed P. 48. l. 17. add as such i e. his Spiritual Seed as such P. 5. l. 2. blot out all P. 50. l. 20. for many read any P. 51. l. 9. and 15. for a Covenant read the Covenant P. 51. l. 11. read the Infant-Seed of believing Gentiles as such P. 51. l. 22. for a Covenant read the Covenant P. 51. l. 41. for 1st read 2d P. 52. l. 41. for a Covenant read the Covenant P. 53. l. 39. read Gospel-Church and Covenant and so l. 40. P. 54. l. 16. for a Covenant read the Covenant Note If in any other place you find a Covenant read the Covenant P. 56. l. 43 for Preservation read Perseverance P. 57. l. 28. blot out it was a sign of for pag. 56. read 59. P. 59. l. 9. for Land read Law P. 61. l. 3. blot out for P. 62. l. 37. blot out now P. 63. for this is read is this P. 65. l. 3. blot out all and for Churches read Church P. 67. l. 40. for and read but. P. 68. read
late here in England were deluded to do Therefore we say as to all Precepts of the Gospel that are meer positive Laws the New Testament is our only Rule without the Old Christ alone is our Law-giver and him and not Moses we are only to hear and hearken unto tho as to matter of Faith the Old Testament may be useful to us in many respects and also all Precepts that are purely Moral in their own Nature The Old Testament is a Rule to us as well as the New which I might shew in many respects not only touching the Law of the Decalogue but also about days of Prayer singing God's Praises Fasting-days c. But for any to intimate in the Case of Baptism that the Old Testament is a Rule of Practice or in respect of Jewish Church-Membership such strangely betray their Ignorance as will further appear hereafter For that Circumcision was a meer Legal or Jewish Rite I shall evidently anon fully prove You and Mr. Burkitt with other Pedo-baptists affirm that so little is said in the New Testament about baptizing Infants because the Custom of baptizing them was common and the Practice constant in the Jewish Church at and before our Saviour's time Whilst Circumcision was the covenanting Sign Baptism was the purifying Ceremony among the Jews for when any of the Gentiles were admitted into the Jewish Church both Parents and Children were first circumcised and then washed in token of cleansing them from the Filth of their Heathenism So that Baptism among the Jews constantly went along with Circumcision till our Saviour's time Answ 'T is a sign of a bad Cause when Men are forced to try their Wits after such a ridiculous manner to make out what they have to prove Pray was that Custom among the Jews of baptizing Infants when any of the Gentiles were admitted into the Jewish Church commanded of God Had God given the Jews any such Law or Precept Or was it one of their own Traditions who in their own Wisdom without any Warrant from their great Prophet and Law-giver devised that Ceremony possibly to wash away the Filth of Heathenism as your Predecessors in like manner without any Command or Warrant of Jesus Christ devised the baptizing of Infants to wash away the Filth of Original Sin Doth not our blessed Saviour say that they had made void the Commandments of God through their Traditions I do affirm it was never given them as a Law or Precept by the great God nor do you attempt once to prove any such thing for there is not the least shadow of any such thing in all the Old Testament therefore it was a meer Human Tradition 2. Can any wise Man who would do nothing in God's Service without a sufficient Rule or Warrant from the Word of God think this a good Argument for Infant Baptism I must tell you as I have already told the Athenian Society with whom I had to do in this matter that a Popish Tradition is every way as good as a Jewish one You were better plead thus the Romish Church without any Warrant from God's Word received Infant-Baptism as an unwritten Apâ—stolical Tradition and in some Councils early Quiâ—…que parvulos reâ—ens ab uteris Matrum baptizandos esse 〈◊〉 Aâ—…ma esto Milev Can 2. and anathemized or cursed all who should deny that new-born Infants were to be baptized therefore we may baptize Infants Why do you fly to the fabulous and idle Traditions of the Jewish Rabbins for your Childish Baptism since you have the Testimony of so many Romish Doctors and General Councils who positively affirm you ought to baptize your children Sure the Authority of the latter is as good as the former 3. But is it so indeed did our Saviour say nothing of Infant Baptism or as you hint leave so little of it in the New Testament because it was the constant Custom among the Jews to baptize the Children of Heathens before they admitted them into their Church What Dr. Hammond Taylor and Lightfoot have said upon that account is to their Shame and Reproach rather than to their Honour tho I know it was their last Refuge when they saw your Scripture-Proofs would not prove it to be a Truth of Christ O how are we beholden to the Jewish Talmud and Jâ—wish Rabbins for our Infant-Baptism Nay which is worst of all how is Christ beholden to them for that rare Invention who had said so much for it and made it so common a Practice among them that it saved him the Pains to give the least Directions about it But is not this next to Blasphemy Can any Man in his right Wits think our Lord Jesus should confirm a Tradition and Innovation of the Jews Or take his great Ordinance of Baptism from the Superstitious Fabulous and Erroneous Custom of their Doctors and Rabbins Besides was Baptism to be preached or practised by none but the Jewish People Doth it not belong to the Gentiles too Did not our Saviour command his Disciples to go into all Nations and make Disciples and baptize them c. Was it in his Mind that Infants should be baptized and yet say nothing of it because it was a common Custom and Practice among the Jews But pray what must the Gentiles do to know this to be their Duty I mean those Gentiles who received the Christian Faith viz. that they ought to baptize their Children who did not know nor ever heard of that Jewish Custom Or dare you say our New Testament is not authentick or sufficient to teach us the whole of gospel-Gospel-Duties and Obedience without the Jewish Talmud You should not 't is plain only have said the New Testament is not without the Old the Rule of our practice but also that the New Testament and the Old without the Jewish Talmud is not sufficient and then you had done your Business at once VVhy are not Men ashamed thus to go about to blind and deceive the poor People Is not the whole Mind of Jesus Christ even all his Laws and Precepts or his whole Counsel plainly contained in his Blessed VVord But would you have People be wise above what is written and teach Men to reflect upon the Care and Faithfulness of the Blessed Jesus in leaving out of the Sacred Bible one great Truth of God and leave us to find it out by going to search the Jewish Tradition 4. If it was a Custom among the Jews it must be a Sacred Custom I mean a Custom that God appointed and commanded them to observe or else a Human Tradition or vain Custom And if it had been a Mosaical Rite given by God himself to the Jews Christ then be sure abolished it and nailed it to his Cross with all its Fellows and 't is gone for ever since he hath not given it out a new Take this Argument That Custom among the Jews that God never commanded nor is any where given by Moses unto them who was faithful in all his House
the Seal of the Covenant of Grace for hath the Covenant of Grace any other Seal that Seals to us all the Blessings of that Covenant save the Holy Spirit only the Spirit of God is called a Seal Eph. 1. 13 14. Chap. 4. 30. but so is not baptism called any where 2. If all your Children have the Seal of the Covenant of Grace or all the blessings thereof sealed up to them shall they not be all saved all know a Seal confirms and gives an assurance of all the Priviledges Blessings and Profits that are contained in that Covenant to which it is prefix'd 3. You falsly also apply that Text in Ezek. 16. 5 6 7. that is not applicable to our Infants as such but to God's Israel or Believers who were once like that wretched Infant cast out in its Blood but God entered into Covenant with us and washed us c. But are all believers Children washed in the Blood of Christ no doubt they are in the Covenant of Grace that go to Heaven that die in Infancy but the rest remain polluted in their Original and actual pollution until they believe in Christ Jesus and are negenerated by Divine Grace tho' they are baptized for that washeth them not 4. Set time a part say you for earnest praying praying to the Lord for to forgive the Sins of your Child to Sanctifie his Nature and bless the Ordinance of Baptism unto him c. Answ Prayer is good and a great Duty 't is to pray for our Children but take heed how you pray their baptism may be blessed since Christ did not appoint any Baptism for them in Infancy hath he promised any blessing to that or will he bless an Invention of Men 5. When the Minister doth baptize thy Child do thou act Faith in God's Covenant for thy self and thy Child c. Ans How can you act Faith in doing that which God hath made no promise unto you or to your Children believers that are baptized may act Faith indeed 1. Because Christ commandeth them to be baptized Mat. 28. 19 20. Acts 2. 37. 2. Because he hath promised unto them great blessings in Baptism Mark 16. 16. Acts 2. 37 38. but there is neither a precept for nor promise made unto Infants Baptized 1. Speedily do it stay not as Moses did to Circumcise his Child Exod. 4. 24. the which had like to cost him his life it is true God bindeth us not at this time to the Eighth day as he did the Jews yet we ought not to delay Vid. Cypr. Fidem Ep. 59. Answ Make not more speedy hast then good speed or more hast then God directeth you why not delay since God no where saith on the Eighth Day nor at a year Old nor three years Old but when they believe then they ought to rise indeed and not tarry and be baptized but since you have no Scripture for this advise you Quote Cyprian who would not have the Adult delay if he speaks it of Infants he is no rule for us the Ordinance was corrupted in his time where is it written in Gods Word Moses had a command to Circumcise his Son on the Eighth Day therefore he ought not to delay longer but what is this to your case 2. Cheerfully as one Marrieth his Child with the Lord Jesus Christ Answ Cheerfully do it no do it not at all on your peril For 't is as Mr. Baxter saith a strange Marriage where there is nothing of consent 3. Publickly say you before the Congregation Answ And yet not ashamed shew your authority first Your other advice seems tolerable good save what you speak concerning your Infant Baptism in Teaching your Children the knowledge of the Holy Scriptures and giving them good examples and in putting them into godly Families in doing thus you may expect a blessing from God but none of these things will add any vertue to their Infant Baptism to make that any ways effectual to them so much only shall suffice as toy our 18th Chapter CHAP. XXIII In answer to Mr. James Owens 19th Chapter wherein he gives advice to Children with an answer to his Queries that he would have the Antipedobaptists to reply unto CHildren bless the Lord for the priviledges of your Baptism God hath taken you into Covenant say you with your Parents he hath prevented you with the blessings of goodness and made you nigh who being by Nature a far off ye are no more Strangers and Foreigners but fellow Citizens with the Saints and the Houshold of God Eph. 2. 19. 1. Answ Must they bless God that their Parents deceived them with false hopes of priviledges which neither they nor your selves know what they are or for putting a cheat upon them to make them think their State is better thereby and yet cannot prove it from Gods Word so to be How doth God prevent them with blessings of Goodness by your Rantizing them doth your pretended baptism insuse grace or gracious habits unto them or what to 〈◊〉 or is â—t the blessings of that Vow you brought them under voluntarily without any authority from God 2. Are you not afraid to affirm that Children by their baptism are by the Lord made neer unto him and made thereby Children of God who were by Nature Children of Wrath and no more Strangers and Foreigners c. If this was so shall they not be all Saved Can any thing bring Children near to God and make them fellow-Heirs and Citizens with the Saints but a Sacred Work of God's Spirit upon their Souls and doth your Baptism do this 2. Can such that are no more Strangers to God c. ever perish Is there a possibility of Final falling from a State of true Grace and if it be thus ought not your Children to have all the priviledges of the Houshold of God the Lords Supper c. 3. Will you attribute those High and Sublime Priviledges that belong to believers who are only born of the Spirit to your poor Babes that yet remain Children of Wrath and unrenewed by the Grace of God is not this a ready way to blind the Eyes of your Children and ruine their Souls if they should believe you herein You are under that Gracious Providence say you which watcheth over the Church c. 1. Answ You must first prove them Members of the Church and not only Members but all of them elected Persons for they are such Members that the special Providence of God is over 2. You say they have a share in the daily prayers that are put up for the Church of God Psalm 72. 15. Prayers shall be made for him and daily shall he be praised Psalm 51. 13. Do good in thy good pleasure to Zion and build the Walls of Jerusalem Gal. 6. 16. As many as walk according to this rule peace on them and mercy on the Israel of God If you had been without baptism you should have been without and so without any share in these prayers Answ I
all are to perish with the using after the Commandments and Doctrines of Men Col. 2. 21 22. 2. You say before they had their re-baptization they we more Charitable in their Judgment but afterwards they are usuallâ— of a strict and narrow Judgment Judging hard and uncharitably of them that are not of their perswasion therefore this Opinion that quencheth Love is not of God 1 Cor. 13. I do not say of them all that their Love to the Brethren waxeth colder when they are baptized but of the greatest part of them the virtue of the Grace of God overcometh the vertue of this Opinion and keepeth them from falling into the same Temptation of uncharitableness with others 1. Answ None of us were ever re-baptized pray cease your hard and uncharitable Pen and Tongue 2. Our Charily is greater far then that Mans whose Opinion about Infant Baptism leads him to cast all out of the Holy Catholick Church who disown Infant Baptism and are baptized as Believers 3. We have so much Charity to all godly Christians that are pedo-baptists that we own them to be our Brethren and Members of the Mystical Body of Christ and have the like Love to them as to those who are of our own perswasion in the point of Baptism even to all where we see the Image of God 4. If any among us are too uncharitable yet assure your self it is not this Ordinance of Christ which they own that naturally leads them forth so to be but 't is from the corruption of their own hearts therefore you do very ill to Father it on their Opinion 5. But as to Communion at the Lord's Table we believe we are limited and bounded therein by the rule of God's Word and 't is not for want of Charity to your Churches we cannot have Church Communion with you` tho' all other Communion of Saints we can have with you but 't is because we would walk orderly as God directeth us in the Gospel and I should be sorry to hear any of my Brethren to be of another mind I am for Catholick Communion and Charity with all Saints tho' not for Church Communion with any that are unbaptized as I believe you all are that have only had Infants Rantism 3. There are others since their re-baptization say you go further and have fallen from one delusion into another some set up free will others denying the Christian Sabbath others against Catechizing of Children c. 1. Answ 'T is very uncharitable in you to reflect upon the whole party of Baptized Believers from the errours of some that are of our Opinion in respect of Baptism 2. You may see a Confession of our Faith and a late Narrative of the result of a General Assembly of Pastors Ministers and Messengers of 107 Churches in which we Testifie against free-will and do abhor that Notion and own the Christian Sabâ—… viz. the first day of the Week and vindicate the Catechising of Children have also published a Catechism to that end and do bewail the neglect of that great Duty where ever it is found to be neglected either among us or others 2. But are there no free-willers nor Baxterians among you whose principles are much the same if not something worse why then do you thus reflect on us Require plain Answers say you from them unto these Questions and cause them to prove all from the Holy Scriptures the God of all Grace settle you in the present Truth that ye might bring forth Fruits meet to your Baptism Thus you end your Book Answ You have had plain Answers unto all your Questions and many other Questions for you to Answer and we have proved all we say from the Scriptures from whence you will never prove your Practice of Infant Baptism whilst the World standeth And now the good Lord open your eyes and the eyes of your Sons and Daughters to see their Error and shew you the Ancient Footsteps of the Flock that you and they may feed besides the Shepherds Tents and increase Love and Charity among us all which is too much wanting O where is the power of godliness Many can spy the Mote in their Brothers Eye CHAP. XXIV Containing some brief practical use of the whole precedent Treatise with seasonable Counsel to Parents c. NOw Reader from what thou hast heard or read in this Treatise and answer to Mr. James Owen 1. I may infer that all those who have only been Sprinkled or Rantized who are afterwards Baptized when they Believed are not re-baptized as Mr. Owen doth affirm nor do they renounce their Baptism tho' they do renounce the practice and Human Tradition of Sprinkling of Infants or Adult Persons 2. We may also infer that 't is a hard thing to restore a lost Ordinance or to reform about a long standing Custom and Tradition of Men. 1. Do all you Pious Parents bless God for Christ and the Gospel and for all those priviledges he hath bestowed upon you and upon your Children who when they are grown up set under the precious and clear Preaching of Christ Crucified Be sure improve these blessings and take heed that you walk in all things according to the rule of God's Word and do not follow a Multitude to do evil tho' some of them are good Men. O tremble to do any thing in God's Worship without lawful authority from him I mean precept or example from his Word do not adventure to Baptize much less to Rantize your Children any more whatever Mr. Owen or any Man on Earth saith unless you can find it written in your Bibles God hath not commanded you to bring them into a baptismal Covenant in their Infancy nor made any promise of blessing to assist them in performing that Covenant if you do bring them into it of your own Head voiuntarily If you do and will do this thing notwithstanding you have no authority from God's Word to do it Pray consider what I have said in this Treatise about this devised and unwarrantable Covenant by which you may heap up much guilt upon your selves and lay such a Load and Burden upon your Children that you are not aware of Mr. Williams's frightnes them with the Sin of Perjury who violate this Covenant may not this tend to drive them into despair and God will never charge them with Perjury since he never commanded them to enter into any such Covenant Your Children who when grown up if wicked and ungodly have too much guilt both Original sin and Actual sin lying upon them there is little need to add to their Burden for their want of Light and by Reading of such Mens Books they may perhaps thus charge themselves Mr. Dan. Williams says 't is the damning sin no no the Damning sin is the breach of God's Law and particularly the sin of unbelief Nay and doth not his words Imply that when your Children are grown up and they by Light received from God's word should be couvinced they were never baptized
40. See thou make all things according to the Pattern shewed thee in the Mount and Lev. 10. 1 2. See how Nadab and Abihu sped for presuming to vary from the Command of God and Uzzah tho' but in small Circumstances as they may seem to us How dare Men adventure this being so to change Baptism from Dipping into Sprinkling and the Subject from an Adult Believer to an Ignorant Babe Add thou not unto his word c. Arg. 15. Whatever practice opens a Door to any Human Traditions in God's Worship is a great Evil and to be avoided But the practice of Infant Baptism opens a Door to any Human Traditions in God's Worship Ergo to Sprinkle or Baptize Infants is a great Evil and ought to be avoided The Major will not be denied The Minor is clear because there is no Scripture ground for it no Command or Example for such a Practice in God's Word and if without Scripture Authority the Church hath power to do one thing she may do another and so ad infinitum Arg. 16 Whatsoever practice reflects upon the Honour Wisdom and Care of Jesus Christ or renders him less faithful than Moses and the New Testament in one of its great Ordinances nay Sacraments to lie more obscure in God's Word than any Law or Precept under the Old Testament cannot be of God But the practice of Infant Baptism reflects on the Honour Care and Faithfulness of Jesus Christ and renders him less faithful than Moses and a great Ordinance nay Sacrament of the New Testament to lie more dark and obscure than any Precept under the Old Testament Ergo Infant Baptism cannot be of God The Major cannot be denyed The Minor is easily proved For he is bold indeed who shall affirm Infant Baptism doth not lie obscure in God's Word One great Party who assert it say it s not to be found in the Scripture at all but 't is an unwritten Apostolical Tradition Others say it lies not the Letter of the Scripture but may be proved by Consequences and yet some great asserters of it as Dr. Hammond and others say those Consequences commonly drawn from divers Texts for it are without demonstration and prove nothing I am sure a Man may Read the Scripture a Hundred times over and never be thereby convinced he ought to baptize his Children though it is powerful to convince Men of all Christian Duties Now can this be a Truth since Christ was more Faithful than Moses and delivered every thing plainly from the Father Moses left nothing dark as to matters of Duty tho' the Precept and Eternal Rites of his Law were numerous even two or three hundred Precepts yet none were at a loss or had need to say is this a Truth or an Ordinance or not for he that Runs may Read it And shall one positive precept given forth by Christ who appointed so few in the New Testament be so obscure as also the Ground and End of it that Men should be confounded about the Proofs of it together with the End and Grounds thereof See Heb. 3. 5 6. Arg. 17. That Custom or Law which Moses never delivered to the Jews nor is any where written in the Old Testament was no Truth of God or of Divine Authority But that Custom or Law to baptize Proselytes either Men Women or Children was never given to the Jews by Moses nor is it any where written in the Old Testament Ergo it was no Truth of God or of Divine Authority and evident it is according to that Forementioned and Worthy Author Sir Norton Knatchbal that the Jewish Rabbins differed among themselves about it for saith he to Cite his very words again Rabbi Eleaezer expresly contradicts Rabbi Joshua who was the first I know of who asserted this sort of Baptism among the Jews for Eleazer who was contemporary with Rabbi Joshua if he did not live before him asserts that a Proselyte Circumcised and not Baptized was a true Proselyte Arg. 18. If Baptism is of Meer positive Right wholly depending on the Will and Sovereign Pleasure of Jesus Christ the great Legislator and he hath not Requi red or Commanded Infants to be baptized then Infants ought not to be baptized but Baptism is of meer positive right wholly depending on the Will and Sovereign pleasure of Jesus Christ the great Legislator and he hath not required or Commanded Infants to be baptized Ergo Infants ought not to be baptized This Argument tends to cut off all the pretended proofs of Pedo-baptism taken from the Covenant made with Abraham and because Children are said to belong to the Kingdom of Heaven it was not the Right of Abraham's Male Children to be Circumcised because they were begotten and born of the Fruit of his Loyns till he received Commandment from God to Circumcise them Had he done it before or without Command from God it would have been Will-worship in him to have done it Moreover this further appearâ— to be so because no godly Mans Children nor others in Abraham's days nor since had any Right thereto but only his Children or such who were bought with his Money or were proselyted to the Jewish Religion because they had no Command from God so to do as Abraham had This being true it follows that if we should grant Infants of believing Gentiles as such were the Seed of Abraham which we deny yet unless God had Commanded them to baptize their Children they ought not to do it and if they do it without a Command or Authority from Christ It will be found an Act of Will-worship in them Arg. 19. All that were baptized in the Apostolical Primitive times were baptized upon the profession of their Faith were baptized into Christ and thereby put on Christ and were all one in Christ Jesus and were Abraham's Seed and Heirs according to the promise But Infants as such who are baptized were not baptized upon the profession of their Faith nor did they put on Christ thereby nor are they all one in Christ Jesus and also are not Abrahams Seed and Heirs according to Promise Ergo Infants ought not to be baptized Mr. Baxter confirms the substance of the Major these are his words i. e. As many as have been baptized have put on Christ and are all one in Christ Jesus and are Abrahams Seed and Heirs according to the promise Gal. 3. 27 28 29. This speaks the Apostle saith he of the probability grounded on a credible profession c. Baxters Confirm Reconcil page 32. The Minor will stand firm till any can prove Infants by a visible profession have put on Christ are all one in Christ Jesus are Abrahams Seed and Heirs according to the promise Evident it is none are the spiritual Seed of Abraham but such who have the Faith of Abraham and are truly grafted into Christ by a saving Faith If any object we read of some who were baptized who had no saving Faith but were Hypocrites I answer had they appeared to be
and twelfth and last Argument YOU say Infant Baptism is an excellent means which God hath ordained for to plant and continue the Church of God Christ thus commanded his Apostles to gather Churches among the Gentiles by teaching and baptizing them in the Name of the Father c. Mat. 28. 29. Answ I answer The way it appears that Christ commanded his Apostles to gather Churches among the Gentiles is first to teach them and then baptize them you say right whilst you repeat the Text but God hath not commanded to baptize Infants and that way to plant his Church You add It is an excellent means for this end making Children to be Disciples of Christ let none marvel at this because Infants are of the number of Disciples Acts 15. 11. Why tempt ye God to put a yoke on the necks of the Disciples Those Disciples were say you the Faithful and their Seed Answ This is not true The Disciples in the Text you cite refer only to Believers among the Gentiles those false Teachers would have the Brethren be circumcised and they were they only that are called Disciples These Brethren being Gentiles were never circumcised and therefore these false Teachers taught them so to be see Acts 15. 1. 2. Sir I will appeal to your Conscience in this matter Is not a Disciple one that is taught or instructed and can Infants be called Disciples who are not capable of being taught Mr. Baxter saith Such that are made Disciples by teaching are the Subjects of Baptism according to the Commission and he is in the right 3. Doth the baptizing of Infants make them Disciples Doth Christ say baptize and so make them Disciples Or is it not make Disciples and baptize them Mathetusate disciplize and then it follows baptize them You say Christ knoweth how to administer a secret Doctrine to Infants according to his promise Thy Children shall be all taught of the Lord. Answ 1. No doubt but Christ is able to do it But doth he in a secret way administer Instruction to Infants prove it and also how you come to know it for they must be known Disciples visible Disciples that are to be baptized 2. Are they little Infants that Promise refers to i. e. Thy Children shall be all taught of God They are Sion's Children or such that are born of God that are under that Promise not Infants or our Children as such for are all Believers natural Offspring taught of God when Babes or adult either O abominable abuse of the holy Text Baptism say you setteth little Children under a particular obligation to be the Lord's doubtless they can receive such an obligation now as formerly they did Deut. 29. 11 12. And it is as certain that this Bond is a great advantage to make them willing when they come to age God hath presented them by the Grace of his Covenant c. Answ 1. 'T is you pretend to lay them under an obligation but not by Christ's authority prove he hath commanded you so to do 2. Doth Baptism confer Grace you seem to assert this for else how hath God by Baptism prevented them Your sprinkling them with water doth not cannot prevent them I affirm therefore 't is an obligation of man's devising for you cannot prove it is of God's appointment therefore to refuse to bring them under such an obligation is no fantastick thing as you intimate it is You say the mark of the Spirit is upon them Answ Baptism is no mark of the Spirit to any but to such who have the Spirit and what a Mock-Baptism is it to give the Sign where appears no demonstration of the thing thereby signified You say on the other side Satan hath not such an advantage against those that are baptized in their Infancy Answ How doth it appear that Satan hath not such an advantage against your Children as he hath against ours that were never baptized as you call Rantism I am sure our Children generally are as sober and helped to escape Satan's snares as far forth as yours generally are VVill God own or bless an humane Tradition The Woman that Luther mentioned no doubt might think she was obliged to fear God by that sort of Baptism she had when she was an Infant yet God never obliged her to come under that obligation but may be she was baptized when a Believer However the Papists may argue for their voluntary Vows after the same manner viz. it is a great help and an advantage to them to preserve them from sin and temptations of the Devil Infant-Baptism is an excellent means you say to plant the true Religion and to continue the Church by giving an advantage for the Ministers of the Gospel to reason with such when they come to age far better than they can with those that are not baptized that they might call them to remembrance of their baptismal Vow c. Answ This is certainly a grand mistake for instead of its being an advantage to Ministers to reason with such that were baptized in their Infancy to remember their baptismal Vow and so to believe and turn to God 't is apparent it may â—inder them for if those persons when grown up do call to remembrance what you Pedobaptists have taught and told them touching those Blessings and Privileges they then received it may rather take them off from seeking after either Faith or Repentance 1. For you tell them when their Parents believed and were saved they were made partakers of the same Privilege and Blessing also if so what need they concern themselves about getting personal Faith you believe and teach them the Doctrine of final Perseverance no doubt such who are in a state of Grace can never finally fall out of it 2. The Obligation and Vow that lies upon baptized persons according to the Scripture is not that they seek after Regeneration no for it necessarily supposeth that they had that before baptized but it doth bind or oblige them to persevere in Holiness that as they have been buried in Baptism as persons dead to sin so they should walk in newness of life Rom. 6. 3 4. Now you would have your Baptism to oblige your baptized Children to become dead to sin they were not it appears dead when buried with Christ in Baptism but you bury them alive if you baptized them To shew them they must die Sir God never ordained Baptism to such an end or to oblige persons thus to do see Rom. 6. 3. 4 5 6 7 8. Col. 1. 12 13. 3. The Church of England saith That the Child which they baptize is thereby that is in Baptism regenerated and made a Child of God a Member of Christ and an Inheritor of the Kingdom of Heaven And what you say implies as much for it must needs be thus if when the Parents believe and are regenerated and saved the Child partakes of the same privilege then the Child believed and was regenerated and saved also Now if this be so what
advantage can Ministers have from the Consideration of Infants Baptism to press Regeneration or the Performance of Repentance upon them when they come to age above what we have to press these great Duties upon our Children when grown up that never were baptized What need is there to press that on the Consciences of your Children when they come to age which they had wrought in them when they were in their Infancy No your Work is rather to press them as Saints and renewed Persons to live holy Lives and improve those Divine Habits which they received when their Parents believed or those inspired Habits that were plauted in their Souls when in Infancy they were baptized and regenerated 4. Certainly your Children when they come to age may think that they received some mighty Privilege in their Infancy by being in the Covenant of Grace with their Parents and so in a State safe enough for you tell them there is no final Falling from a State of true Grace We and you too know that and declare that the Covenant of Grace is sure to all the true Seed or Spiritual Seed of Abraham of which Seed you declare all your natural Off-spring as such are a part This being so it is evident that Ministers have no Advantages but the contrary in pressing the necessity of Repentance and Conversion on your Children when at age we have the greater advantage far in preaching to our Sons and Daughters who tell them that our Faith did not cannot profit them or save them no but that they were born in sin and were Children of Wrath by Nature and so remain till true actual Faith and Regeneration do pass upon them or they do believe in Christ 5. Besides the Baptismal Vow you brought them under being not by God's Appointment what Blessing can you expect from thence Will God own and bless a voluntary Vow or approve of an Humane Tradition 6. The Papists as I hinted before may expect as well and from as good Ground and Authority as great advantage to press Holiness and Chastity upon those that they bring under their voluntary Vows and Covenants in their Nunneries and Fryaries 7. Besides your Children entred not into that Baptismal-Covenant you talk of by their own consent they knew nothing of it and can find no Authority from God's Word you had to bring them under it and therefore what power is that like to have upon their Consciences Had you not better bring them under a solemn Vow to become good and to repent as soon as they come to age nay bring them under an Oath or cause them to enter into a solemn Covenant so to do and set their Hands unto it But you will say you have no Command nor Warrant from God's Word to do that no more say we have you any Command or Warrant from the Word of God to bring them under any such Baptismal Vow â—o forsake Sin the Devil and all his Works c. in their Infancy Infant-Baptism is so effectual to continue the true Religion and the Encrease of the Church of God at this time as Circumcision formerly had been It pleased God to continue true Religion among the Jews by bringing their Children under the Bond of the Covenant He left them not to their own liberty c. and let none take upon them to be wiser than God by leaving Children at this time to follow their own Fancies to choose their own Religion without having God's Covenant upon them for Humane Nature is as corruptible at this time as formercy c. Answ 1. I answer Circumcision was God's absolute and positive Command in the Jewish Church which was national but God hath not commanded Infants to be baptized into the Gospel-Church which is not National but Congregational if therefore there was the like Authority from God for the one as there was for the other we would contend with you no longer 2. 'T is you that would seem wiser than God whose Wisdom hath not led him to erect his Gospel Church of such Materials or of such Matter and in such Form now as it was his Wisdom to build the Jewish or Legal Church Must the fleshly Seed as such be taken into the Gospel-Church by Baptism because the Male-Infants were circumcised under the Law Who tells you so where is it written Will you be wiser than God Did not John Baptist say Think not to say within your selves we have Abraham to our Father Now the Ax is laid to the Root of the Tree Now the case is altered as if he should say Now we know no Man after the Flesh 2 Cor. 5. 17 18. 3. Hath not God freely left us and our Children to choose to be his Servants or to choose our Religion Are not the Saints to be all Volunteers Will Christ accept of Prest-Souldiers into his Service Or have you any power to force or compel your Children to be of what Perswasion in Religion you please God it is true hath no more left Children now than formerly to follow their own Fancies no God forbid But he hath commanded them to believe and be baptized and not to follow the Fancies of their Parents any more than to follow their own Fancies nor Ministers who teach them contrary Doctrine to that which the Word of God doth 4. As to the Corruption of our Nature 't is true that is as bad as ever but your Sprinkling your Children in Infancy hath no Virtue or Power in it to change or purge out that Corruption your Children receive no benefit by that you call Baptism Say what you will I am sure you cannot prove they receive any profit thereby 5. I affirm God hath not commanded us to bring our Children into the Bond of the Covenant by Baptism until they believe and you can never disprove us while you live from God's Word You say the Lord hath blessed the Baptism of Infants to be a Means for the continuing of the true Religion and of the Christian Church From the days of the Apostles even to this very day the Lord bestoweth his particular Blessings but upon his own Ordinance he imprinteth not the Seal of Heaven upon earthly Inventions none can deny but that there are thousands baptized in their Infancy that feel in themselves the Virtue of their Baptism Answ 1. I answer You cannot prove that God hath any manner of ways owned or blessed Infant-Baptism for because God hath continued a Seed to serve him in every Age since the Apostles time will you attribute that to Infant-Baptism which is only to be ascribed to the rich and soveraign Grace of God and Power of his Spirit 2. As to the true Church for many years she was hid and in the Wilderness she fled from the face of the Romish Beast and cruel Dragon Rev. 12. I must confess Infant-Baptism hath in part been a means to keep up the name of the Christian Religion in the Church ever since the Apostacy and it was