as needed this new Dispute to take it off But 't is true enough That the Debate about Human Inventions does more particularly concern Baptism than the other parts of Worship his Lordship had insisted on And therefore since the Bishop has offer'd us something new on this Subject I shall the more willingly address my self to the Examination of it because the precedent part of the Admonition has left the Argument between us almost wholly untouch'd and contains little but such slight Cavils about it as were in effect obviated in the Remarks themselves And here I. The Bishop gives us the Reason why he omitted this part of Worship viz. 1. Because it was occasional Admon p. 172 173. not ordinary 1. Answ But he knew that in a Discourse about the Inventions of Men in the Worship of God it was proper to consider that part of Worship about which that Dispute chiefly lay 2. Because he found the Defects and Additions of our Directory so great in this Office that they deserv'd a Discourse by themselves Admon p. 173 174. And accordingly he mentions these following Defects in the Directory 1. There is no express Covenant order'd in the Directory to be made in the name of the Child Baptiz'd either by the Parent or any else tho' there be no other way of engaging a Child that cannot Covenant for it self 2. There is no Profession of the Christian Faith required in the Directory from any Parent or Offerer of any Child 3. There is no solemn Recognition of the Vow of Baptism required from Persons Baptiz'd in their Infancy when they come to understand their Duty As it is in Confirmation with us 4. The express words of the Covenant are not prescribed out of the Word of God but is left to the Discretion of every Minister to impose what he will on the Baptiz'd c. Answ I know no great harm to the Cause of Dissenters if we should own there are some Omissions in the Directory especially when the Compilers to avoid the rigorous and imposing humour that had too long reign'd in others seem to have left many things to the discretion of particular Pastors which they would not positively enjoyn And for these Defects which the Bishop has cited out of Mr. Baxter's Treatise of Infant Baptism they are not so material as his Lordship seems to imagine and are easily supplyed by every Minister that thinks more express Professions requisite than are there positively enjoyn'd As to the first The making of an Express Covenant in the name of the Child if the Bishop mean by it that the Parent should explicitly profess his Dedicating his Child to God and bringing it thereby under a Solemn Obligation to the Duties of his Covenant this is really included in that Profession he is required by the Directory to make of his desire to have it Baptiz'd and accordingly 't is usual for the Ministers to propose the Question more fully to this purpose Do you profess your desire of having this Child dedicated by Baptism to the Faith Worship and Service of God the Father Son and Holy Ghost But if he mean that the Parent or Offerer of the Child should make such a Profession in the Child's name as our Sponsors are order'd to do in the Common-Prayer-Book 't is so far from being a Defect in our Directory that it enjoyns no such thing that 't is no small Blemish of the Office of Baptism in the Service-Book that it requires such a Profession from 'em as personating the Child they present And that his Lordship may be assured Mr. Baxter intended no such Express Covenanting in the name of the Child as this is I shall produce his own words and the rather because I take them to carry great weight and force in 'em in his N. Conformity stated c. he brings in the Lawyer asking What is your fourth Objection against our way of Baptism To which the Minister thus Answers That in personating the Child they say that they and so he by them doth at present believe renounce and desire c. falsly intimating that Infants are at present bound to do this by another And yet the same Men plead that God doth not accept him for the Faith of his Parents when as God requireth no Faith or Repentance of Infants but only that they be the Seed of Penitent Believers devoted to Christ And in the Catechism 't is said that Repentance and Faith are requir'd of Persons to be Baptiz'd and that Infants who cannot perform these are Baptiz'd because they promise 'em by their Sureties which Promise when they come to Age themselves are bound to perform Where note that the former Common-Prayer-Book had They perform 'em by their Sureties They perceiv'd that having said Faith and Repentance are requisite Infants they saw must have at present what is requisite at present And they knew that they had them not themselves and so were fain to hold that the Sureties Faith and Repentance was theirs and a performance of that requir'd Condition But the Makers of the new Book saw that this would not hold and so they say Tho' Faith and Repentance be requir'd of Persons to be Baptiz'd yet Infants are Baptiz'd because they promise 'em by their Sureties to be hereafter perform'd amending the former Errour by a greater or a double one 1. Granting Faith and Repentance are pre-requisite and yet confessing that Infants have neither of their own or Sureties for 'em and yet are to be Baptiz'd 2. Or making a Promise Future Faith and Repentance to be Present Faith and Repentance 3. Or tho' Faith and Repentance be requisite in those that are to be Baptiz'd yet God will at present justifie and save all that have it not in Infancy because they promise it hereafter All plain Contradictions as if they said 'T is requisite in Persons to be Baptiz'd and 't is not requisite L How would you have 'em have answer'd these M. Professed Faith and Repentance are requisite in adult Persons to be Baptiz'd and in Infants that they be the Seed of the Faithful devoted by them to God in Christ according to his offer'd Covenant of Grace Thus far that accurate Divine from whom his Lordship may learn That the modesty of the Compilers of the Directory which made their Orders about this Matter seem defective by leaving some Particulars to the prudence and liberty of particular Ministers is far more excusable than the assurance of those who impose in such solemn Professions things so confus'd and inconsistent If there be any defect in their Orders 't is easily supplied but the mistakes of the Service-Book are remedilesly impos'd on all that Administer this Ordinance according to it For the second Defect viz. That there is in the Directory no Profession of the Christian Faith requir'd from the Parent or Offerer of any Child I think there is such a virtual Profession requir'd by the Directory when it enjoyns the Minister to require
Mistake and demands some place of Scripture to prove this Notion of a Sacraments being a Sign from us to God See Admon p. 180. I shall endeavour herein to give him all reasonable satisfaction And this Account of Sacraments I shall particularly prove in reference to Baptism which is the Sacrament in dispute That Baptism is a Sign from us to God of our Obligation to the Duties of his Covenant as well as a Sign from God to us of the Truth of his Promises is evident from the Apostle Peter's excellent Description of that Internal and Saving Baptism which the External Washing is the Sign of viz. 1 Pet. 3.25 That 't is not the putting away the filth of the Flesh i. e. Baptism is not meerly or principally that but the Answer of a good Conscience towards God Which words manifestly allude to the Covenant-Transaction that passes between the great God and the Adult Person baptiz'd for of such the Apostle here speaks and to the Questions that were to that end propos'd to such as receiv'd this Seal of God's Covenant They were ask't If they believ'd in the Lord Jesus with all their heart See 8 Acts 37. or as some ancient Christian Writers propose the Question If they recounc'd the Devil and his Angels the World and its Pomps If they believ'd in If they devoted themselves to the Father Son and Holy Ghost c. And their sincere Profession and Promise of doing so which in Baptism they ratified by this External Rite of Washing with Water is that which the Apostle here calls the Answer of a good Conscience towards God So that the Apostle was so far from supposing that Baptism was not a Sign from us to God that he rather defines it by this part of its end and use viz. To be a Solemn Rite whereby we profess to engage our Hearts to the Duties of his Covenant And indeed since Baptism is the Solemnizing a mutual Covenant between the Blessed God on the one part and our Selves or our Seed on the other it is first a Sign from us to God of our Consent to the proposed Terms of his Covenant before it can be a Sign from him to us of our or our Childrens interest in those Benefits of his Covenant that presuppose our consent as the Condition thereof 'T is the Baptism of Repentance for the Remission of Sins 1 Mark 4. and is therefore first a Sign of our Repentance towards God before it can be a Sign from him of the Remission of Sins And so 't is propos'd by the Apostle Peter at the first time we read of its Administration to his Adult Converts 2 Acts 38 39. Repent and be Baptized every one of you in the Name of Christ for the Remission of Sins for the Promise is unto you and your Children Where they were by Baptism first to profess their Repentance towards God and Faith in our Lord Jesus and then receive the promised Benefit Remission of Sins Nay Christ's own Command to his Apostles first to Disciple or Proselyte all Nations and then to Baptize 'em plainly implys that one great use of Baptism was to be a solemn Bond upon 'em to the Duties of that Christian Profession they had embrac'd and the Baptizing 'em in the Name of the Father Son and Holy Spirit has been always suppos'd to imply a Solemn Dedication of 'em by this Sacred Rite to the Faith Worship and Service of that Blessed Trinity into whose Name they are Baptized There is in that Institution a Seal set to the Covenant of God on our part as well as on his To which 't is not improbable that those words of the Apostle Paul refer 2 Tim. 2.19 Nevertheless the Foundation or as some reader the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Tabula contractus the Covenant of God stands sure having this Seal on God's part The Lord knows them that are his and this Seal on our part Let him that names the Name of Christ depart from iniquity As the Covenant is mutual so the External Rite is intended to ratifie our Restipulation as well as God's Promise and accordingly our breach of the Baptismal Covenant by Apostasie or Infidelity is Perjury and therefore so often in the Scripture Language represented by the breach of the Conjugal Vow that the Adulteress is guilty of And this Notion of Baptism as an obliging Sign from God to us is the more unreasonably deny'd by the Bishop if we consider that 't is this very use of Baptism that chiefly occasion'd the Name of a Sacrament being given to it because Baptism was reckon'd like the Military Oath of the Roman Soldiers as a solemn Listing the Person Baptiz'd into the Service and Warfare of Christ against the World the Flesh and the Devil So that the Bishop has excluded that from the nature and notion of a Sacrament which was the chief if not the only ground of this Rite of the Christian Religion being called one And it were as easie to shew the same concerning the other Institutions that are call'd Sacraments Thus as Circumcision was a Token of the Covenant between God and Abraham and his Seed in their Generations so 't was an obliging Sign on their part as well as on God's part It oblig'd them to receive and obey the Revelations of the Divine Will to ' em And hence after the delivery of the Law of Moses Circumcision was an External Bond on those that receiv'd it to observe that Law as the Apostle Paul plainly intimates to us 5 Gal. 3. He that was Circumcis'd made himself a Debtor to the Law to do it i. e. brought himself under a solemn Tye thereto by this External Rite That the Feasts upon Sacrifices under the Law were Foederal Rites in allusion to the general Custom of those Eastern Nations to Confirm mutual Covenants by Eating and Drinking together See 26 Gen. 30 31.31 Gen. 44 45 46. 9 Jos 14.41 Psal 9.5 Lam. 6. Obad. 7. v. is so largely prov'd by the Learned Dr. Cudworth in his excellent Treatise on the Lord's Supper and Feast upon a Sacrifice that I shall refer the Reader to it for fuller satisfaction And that one passage in the 50 Psalm v. 5. is sufficient to put it out of doubt Gather my Saints together those that have made a Covenant with me by Sacrifice Now the Covenant was made and celebrated not meerly by Offering it up but chiefly by their Religious Feast upon it And as the Lord's Supper succeeds in the place and stead of those Jewish Feasts upon Sacrifices so 't is evidently design'd as such a Foederal Rite whereby we renew our League of Peace with God upon the Memorials of the Attoning Sacrifice of his own Son by our renewed Consent to the Terms of his Covenant And hence the Apostle Paul warns his Corinthian Converts against the Idolatrous Practice of Feasting in the Temples of the Heathen Idols as inconsistent with the Obligations which their Feasting at the Lord's Table had laid upon
the Question propos'd in the Remarks What more peculiar Duties of the New Covenant could Baptism oblige us to And to put the matter if possible out of doubt the Infant is expresly said in the Canon to be by this Badge dedicated to the Service of Christ See Coll. of Cases 2d Edit p. 377 378. I know indeed the ingenious Author of the Case relating to the Cross in Baptism distinguishes here between and immediate and proper and an improper and declarative Dedication and accordingly would perswade us that the Convocation only designed the latter partly because they refer to the words us'd in the Service Book when the Child is cross't partly because they suppose the Child dedicated by Baptism before and suppose Baptism compleat without the sign of the Cross But I see not that either of these Reasons warrant us to take the words of the Convocation in so very strain'd and improper a sense as this is viz. That when they affirm the Cross to be a lawful outward Ceremony and honourable Badge whereby the Infant is dedicated to the Service of him that died on the Cross they should mean no more than that 't is a lawful outward Ceremony and honourable Badge to declare that the Infant has been dedicated to Christ by another outward Ceremony and honourable Badge before For 't is evident that the words us'd when the Child is sign'd with the sign of the Cross do as fully and directly express a proper immediate Dedication as the words us'd when 't is Baptiz'd and therefore we have no reason from them to apply so unusual and odd a sense to the words of the Canon and the Convocations supposing Baptism compleat without the sign of the Cross does no way Argue that they design'd not a proper renew'd Dedication by the Cross for tho' we are dedicated by Baptism yet we properly renew that Dedication as oft as we attend the Lord's Table And the Romish Church does in their Ritual See Rit Rom. Paris 1635. p. 7. suppose no more necessary by Divine Right to this Sacrament than we do and speak of their Ceremonies as only pertaining to the Solemnity of that Sacrament yet they use several other Rites for proper immediate Dedication besides that of washing with water 3. The Cross is made a distinguishing sign of our Christian Profession and the Relations we are thereby invested in For this evidently follows from its being made the Honourable Badge of our Dedication to the Service of a crucified Saviour So that by being cross't we do truly according to the establisht Church wear the Livery of Christ as by being Baptiz'd And this former Paternal sign is as effectually made the common Symbol and Tessera of our Discipleship the mark of our belonging to him as our Lord and Master as the latter can be II. Now from hence I farther infer That the Cross is made as much a Sacrament as Men can make any sign of their own for which they can produce no Divine Institution 'T is set up for most of the same uses as Baptism nay for such uses as do constitute it a proper part of positive Worship that has no stamp of Divine Authority and consequently 't is made a sinful Human Invention For if as the Bishop himself supposes all ways of Worship are displeasing to God that are not expresly contained in the Holy Scriptures nor warranted by the Examples of Holy Man therein or as he now adds that cannot be by parity of Reason deduc'd thence much more are all parts of Worship truly displeasing to him and such as our Saviour justly censures for vain Worship that are no way Instituted And yet that all those Rites in Religious Worship whereby we oblige and bind our selves to serve God or which is the same Dedicate our selves to his Service are a proper part of Positive Worship is evident from the Bishop's own confession who p. 4. of his Discourse does therefore make the Sacraments to be a part of outward Worship not only on the account of our expressing therein our dependance on the grace of God but likewise on the account of obliging and binding our selves by 'em to serve him And doubtless it does as properly belong to God alone to appoint the Religious Rites whereby we bind our selves to his Service as to the Supreme Magistrate to appoint the Ceremonies us'd in our taking the Oath of Fidelity and Allegiance Nay it belongs to him alone to appoint the Honourable Badge of our Discipleship who receives us into his Holy Covenant and no inferiour Pastors are any more authoriz'd to superadd any other Rite for this use to that he has Instituted already than the Servant of any great Prince is warranted of his own Head to prescribe to his Fellow-servants the wearing of a new Livery as an Honourable Badge of their belonging to such a Master besides that which he has appointed of his own choosing To set up External Rites for such Sacramental uses as these viz. not only to instruct us in the Priviledges and Duties of the New Covenant but to oblige and bind us to 'em and to be the Honourable Badge of our Christian Profession when God has already instituted other Rites for these very ends is a piece of Presumption we dare not be guilty of 'T is an offering him a part of Worship which has no stamp of his Authority which therefore we have no reason to hope he will accept nay which there is no shadow of Reason for if his own Foederal Rites be sufficient for all the ends they are appointed for Having thus stared my Argument I come II. To shew the insufficiency of the Bishop's Answer to this Argument All that I can find he has directly reply'd to my Argument is only this That the whole force of it seems to proceed from two Mistakes concerning the nature of Sacraments First As if they were signs from us to God and not wholly from God to us Secondly As if we were to learn the true Nature of Sacraments from the Schools and partial Definitions of interessed Disputants and not from the Holy Scriptures Hence saith the Bishop he has not given us one place of Scripture to prove his imperfect Account of a Sacrament As to this Answer to the Argument I need do no more for the Refutation of it than refer the Reader to the foregoing Account of a Sacrament wherein I fully prov'd concerning Sacraments in general and particularly that of Baptism that they are as truly and properly signs from us to God as from God to us nay that they cannot be the latter without being the former And this I have prov'd not from the Dictates of the Schools but from the Oracles of God having quoted no other Human Authority but his own and I hope he will not reckon himself one of those Partial and Interessed Disputants he speaks of So that 't is not the force of my Argument but of his Answer that proceeds from a
our glorying in the sufferings of Christ and 't is proper to make a Profession of doing so in our Baptism Therefore the Scriptures warrant our use of it in general and particularly at that time Admon p. 181 182 183. Since then may the Papists in Italy or Spain argue 't is our Duty to savour the things of God To have our Lips season'd with Wisdom and Grace To open our Ears to the Doctrine of Christ as becomes his Disciples To preserve our Garments clean by immaculate Purity of Life that we may appear faultless before the Tribunal of Christ To walk in the Light by a blameless observance of our Baptismal Vows that we may with the wise Virgins be admitted to the Heavenly Nuptials Nay since 't is as proper to make a Profession of all this in our Baptism as of Glorying in the sufferings of Christ And since the Scriptures warrant us to make that Profession not only by Words but also by such Actions as the Vniversal custom of our Country has made significant to those Vses we are thereby warranted to use all the Rites forementioned in the Celebration of Baptism since by the universal custom of our Country See Rit Rom. they are applied to signifie our obligation to these undoubted Duties of Christianity Nay the Bishop's Argument will go farther For since 't is as lawful to profess our Glorying in the sufferings of Christ in other parts of Religious Worship as in Baptism and universal custom has applied this Action to signifie our doing so why do we not imitate instead of blaming the Papists for their so frequently crossing themselves in all their Devotions Or rather since the Scriptures command us to express the inward religious sense of our Minds by Actions nay since as the Bishop asserts Scripture-Presidents not only warrant but oblige us to use such actions as well as words as by universal custom signifie our glorying in the sufferings of Christ How come we to lay aside so pious a custom so commendable nay so necessary an Expression of our devout respect to a crucified Saviour which we are not only warranted but oblig'd to use Nay as the Romish Church has in other parts of Divine Worship introduc'd a great number of Actions or Rites to express some part or other of our Christian Duty or Devotion and those Actions are rendred significant to that purpose by universal custom among those of that Church 't is plain by this Argument that all those Rites are warranted by Scripture and our first Reformers seem to have been very unreasonable in their Rejection of ' em So that this loose way of Reasoning will serve to worse purposes than I hope his Lordship ever design'd it For it will altogether as well fit the mouth of a Papist for justifying his observance of most of those numerous Rites and Ceremonies or in his Lordship's language significant Actions which their Church has enjoyn'd as it does his for justifying the Cross in Baptism If the Bishop should pretend that the numerousness of those Rites is the only fault of 'em he would do well to acquaint us where we may stop what number of 'em is innocent and what becomes sinfully excessive Thirdly I come to examine the Propositions the Bishop has laid down for proving the use of the Cross in Baptism to be warranted by Scripture and shew wherein I think his Argument in 'em weak and unconcluding That we are according to Proposition the first to express our inward Reverence or Worship of God by outward Means such as Praise Prayer c. will be freely granted That we are according to Proposition the second and third to express that inward Worship in general by such bodily Gestures as either nature or civil custom direct us to and render most fit to represent and testifie it to others by will be also own'd But I cannot so easily grant That the Scriptures warrant our expressing the sense of our Minds in all Religious Things or Matters by significant Actions The particular Duties we owe to God are almost numberless and if we were warranted by Scripture to express the Thoughts and Sense of our Mind as to each of 'em by some significant Rite and Ceremony the Romish Church would be sufficiently authoriz'd by Scripture in her introducing such a load of significant Rites and Ceremonies into Christian Religion Admon p. 181. especially if as the Bishop observes such significant Actions be more effectual and sincere expressions of the sense of our Minds then words Tho' then the Scriptures enjoyn Bodily Worship in general and consequently warrant all such devout Postures as either nature or civil custom has taught us to express it by as bowing prostration kneeling standing and in these parts of the world the mens being uncover'd yet they do not warrant us to contrive distinct significant Actions to express each distinct part of inward Worship as one to express our Faith in God another to express our Love to him another our Hope another our subjection to his Authority another our resignation to his disposal another our dread of his Justice c. So tho' we may testifie our Worship of Christ as the Incarnate Word by the forementioned Postures of Devotion yet the Scriptures no where warrant our contriving one significant Action or Rite to express but Believing his Gospel another to express our Reliance on the virtue of his Merits and Sacrifice another to signifie out subjection to his Royal Authority another to declare out glorying in his Cross or Sufferings Besides the Religious Postures that are expressive of Worship in general the Scriptures require no other External Rites as Signs of our particular respect to him besides those of being Baptiz'd in his Name and commemorating his Death by receiving the Bread and Wine as the sacred Memorials of it Therefore As to the fourth and fifth Proposition Tho' 't is our duty to glory in the sufferings of Christ yet the Scripture does not warrant much less oblige us as the Bishop adds to contrive any particular Rite or Ceremony to signifie it any more than to contrive such a Rite do signifie but belief of his Gospel or dependance on his Mediation or subjection to his Government The Scriptures command our expressing our inward Worship by Reverence in our Bodily Postures and consequently uncovering the Head is to us a Particular included in that general Precept But the Scripture no where commands us to signifie this particular Duty of glorying in the sufferings of Christ by any External Rites and therefore does not warrant any particular Rite for that end for that would have been to have left a Gap open for bringing in an endless Train of such significant Rites of our own devising into Christian Religion even such as would have made the Yoke of Christianity as heavy as that of Judaism once was As to the sixth and seventh Proposition it plainly follows from what has been suggested That if the Scripture neither