concluded it is in the order of things acted as uttered that repentance goeth before faith and that a man actually may repent before hee actually beleeveth the Gospel and so Rom. 10. 9. If thou shalt confesse with thy mouth is placed before the other if thou shalt beleeve with thine heart Ergo a man may make a saving confession of Christ before hee savingly beleeve with the heart yea if the place it selfe in Marke must bee so closely stuck to without comparing it with the Scriptures of the old Testament which were then when Marke writ the onely Scriptures besides Matthews Gospel existing it would follow in the reason of persons then living that the Gospel must bee preached to Dogs and Cats Fowles and Fishes c. since it 's expresly said Preach to every creature Thirdly I demand of Mr. B. whether it bee absurd to say the Gospel is preached to little ones which understand not what is said if so then what thinkes hee of that speech of Christ in the presence of the little ones which hee uttered concerning them Of such is the kingdome of God and hee that receiveth not the kingdome of God as a little child c. was this Gospel or not surely yes to Mr. B. it is so which holdeth that Christ spake it of their interest in glory it selfe here was then Gospel preached to little ones to Infants yet not absurdly Hee dares not say that was not Gospel which Moses on Gods behalfe uttered Deut. 30. 6. as hath been shewed yet spoken to little ones then present Deut. 27. 14. and that was such Act. 2. 38 39. to so many as might bee present as well as touching so many as were absent Zacharies speech spoken as to his babe Luke 1. And thou child shalt bee called the Prophet of the most high c. it was Gospel preached to a babe But to come to the core of the objection as if absurd to bee baptized unto one knoweth not what or as others when one understands not the mysteries of such an Evangelicall act and ordinance I answer Isaacs circumcision was an Evangelicall ordinance as a signe of Gods covenant of grace with him and to confirme the promise of God to bee a God to him scil to fulfill such promises as Luke 1. 73 74 75. and hee to walk in his father Abrahams footsteps c. as some acknowledge it did signifie sanctification of the spirit justification by Christs blood and faith in him as to come c. and so of an Evangelicall nature if to any to him who was the child of promise yet did not hee then understand these things did God then in injoyning his circumcision so young injoyne an absurditie surely no. Christs act in blessing those Infants Marke 10. and Luke 18. as that also of his imposing hands on them and imbracing them or taking them into his armes these were no legall nor ceremoniall but truely gracious and Evangelicall acts of Christ and very mysterious yet not absurd because they knew not nor understood what hee did for them in blessing of them Peter understood not at present that Evangelicall act of Christ in washing of his feet yet must it bee done or it had beene worse for him John 13. 7. 9. 12. will Mr. B. challenge this act also upon the former grounds to bee absurd As for that whim of I. S. I say wee lay not foundations of building faith upon humane testimony more then they of old in holding out the Doctrine of circumcision Infants circumcised knew not more that they were circumcised in way of an ordinance then children now doe of their baptisme when they come to bee growne up both sorts know it as it is testified to them by others Yea but there was a visible mark to bee seene which is not in baptisme grant it so yet how knew they that it was not given them in ludibrium by enemies or unto some false God and worship by some Idolatrous Priests amongst whom they might bee as captives and they could not know that it was administred to them in a Church way and according to Gods rules but by hear-say by friends or parents And therefore in the maine of knowing both as ordinances administred upon them they are one Fourthly Disciples onely that is beleevers are to bee baptized according to Marke 16. 16. the affirmative including the negative therefore not Infants Let us examine this principle and principall ground worke of our opposites 1. Then it seemes Scripture Disciples of Christ are onely such beleevers as Marke 16. 16. speaketh of and such beleevers onely as that verse mentions are to be baptized which I deny First the beleever mentioned Marke 16. 16. is one that shall surely bee saved and not condemned as the opposition sheweth but neither is every one which is called a Disciple such a one witnesse that John 6. 66. and Act. 20. 30. no true beleevers can so fatally bee rent away as members cruelly torne from the body as the Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth they were but externally in the body of Christ not efficaciously Mr. B. saith a Disciple is in English a Scholler yea but all that are Schollers at schoole come not to good nor do they effectually learne what they are taught Secondly if Marke 16. 16. bee the rule of baptizing then none are by rule to bee baptized but such as savingly beleeve for of such a one hee speaketh in opposition to such a one as is damned And then the Apostles which baptized so many John 4. 1 2. whereof sundry Chap. 6. 66. proved apostates and came no more at Christ breake rule as also did John in baptizing sundry of the multitude amongst whom hee knew were many chaffy hypocrites Matth. 3. 9 10 11 12. but of that more else where And whereas Mr. B. challengeth us to shew an Example of one baptized without faith It 's evident many a one was baptized besides such a one as beleeving and being baptized should bee saved as Marke hath it many a baptized person being never saved as sundry of them John 4. and 6. compared yea if hee meane it of some speciall personall confessing of faith in Christ it was propounded to them as a future thing which afterwards rather they were to attend Act. 19. 4. John said to them that they should beleeve in him which was to come after him and of those scribes and no mention of so much as their confessing of sinnes before their baptisme John sharply reproved them c. and minded them what they should doe afterward bring forth fruits of repentance c. Matth. 3. 7. 8 9 10. and yet hee expresly saith hee doth baptize them c. I indeed saith he baptize you c. but as Mr. B. urgeth us in that matter of shewing any baptized without faith the Scripture saith hee is silent so say I here the Scripture is silent touching these Scribes confession of faith and in Act. 16. 15 16. the Scripture which
therefore will bee your God But I will be a God to thee and thy seed therefore thou and they shall bee circumcised the nature of a seale supposeth a covenant to bee sealed Againe that also is of like truth which is said that it required onely a male of eight dayes old The promise being made indefinitely to the seed whether male or female and not to the eighth day old seed but to the seed albeit but a day old else what had become of them if they died then in respect of that ordinary covenant meanes of their good Rom. 9. 6. 11 Object That promised temporall things to both seeds as Canaan this spirituall Answ Was not Canaan typicall to both seeds as you call them Else why were any condemned for their unbeleefe Heb. 3. last and 4. 1 2. compared Or were temporall things all that was promised in this I will bee your God or was hearts circumcision promised them Deut. 30. a temporall thing or doth not the Gospel now promise and exhibite temporall things also 1 Cor. 3. 21 22. 1 Tim. 4. 8. 12 Object With the Jewes the Church and the State were the same but not so now Answ God never confounded Church and civill state either then or now Who dare make God the author of confusion which is the God of Order Hee then kept them severall paling in the civill state with the judicialls with which the Church as such dealt not but as civill cases came under a Church-consideration Shee had her ceremonialls and moralls to regulate her Kings and Princes Priests Levites and Elders had their proper worke and moved onely in their owne spheres The Elders of the assemblies knew and acted in their places Ecclesiastically without interruption from civill officers or intruding upon civill offices as such Josh 9. and 16. 1. 2. Act. 14. Luke 4. the matters of the King and of the Lord were carefully bounded and sundred 2 Chron. 17. 11. And because I. S. maketh many of these objections let us see whether what himselfe affirmeth will not necessarily confirme much of what wee have said and undermine many things which hee and others of his mind doe hold To bee a God to them saith I. S. was to fulfill his promise to Abraham in particular or to his seed in generall Citing for that Nehem. 9 8. Psal 105. 9 10 11 42. Luke 1. 72 73 74. In token of which God annexed Circumcision as a seale to confirme the same Gen. 17. 11. And againe unto which covenant circumcision was added to put the people alwayes in mind of the said covenant Gen. 17. 11. and a seale to confirme the covenant on both sides God to be a God to them as aforesaid and they to be his owne people above others and so to performe the same condition of faith and obedience as Abraham their father did and to walke as such circumcised in heart unto which they were ingaged by that ordinance Rom. 2. 25 26 27 28 29. otherwise that covenant stood not in force c. First then there was a covenant of grace which onely requireth faith and repentance made with Abrahams seed in generall and so with the body of the Jewes Infants and all as being then particulars of that seed of Abraham in generall God anexing circumcision in token thereof as his mind touching them whilst Infants visibly to confirme the same to them whether they proved elect or reprobate Gen. 17. 11. Secondly then the Initiatory seale of the covenant of grace was not alwayes of present actuall grace in the party sealed but unto future grace and with condition of future actings of faith and repentance Albeit not then able practically and personally to restipulate otherwise then passively and in their parents It being confessed to bee a seale on both seeds of Gods being a God to them c. And putting the people circumcised in mind scil afterwards of the covenant and to performe the conditions of it of faith and repentance c. 3 Then circumcision sealed spirituall things even that covenant I will bee a God to them and so fulfill my promises to them such like as Luke 1. 72 73 74. In token whereof circumcision was annexed to confirme the same And surely it confirming a promise of such mercies as Luke 1. 72 c. it did confirme very spirituall things to them and so not temporall things onely as Canaan c. as sundry have affirmed Also then circumcision ingaging the circumcised persons to beleeve as Abraham did and to bee in heart circumcised c. as I. S. cited that place for that purpose Rom. 2. 25. to the end Hee else-where contradicteth himselfe affirming that faith in the blessed seed was not required either in Abraham or others to be circumcised If it ingaged them to his faith then hee and adult proselytes stood prae-ingaged to the same faith Likewise Infants albeit not actually beleeving at present yet that seale was on them virtually as a present ingagement to after faith c. Nor doth this accord with what I. S. elsewhere affirmeth that circumcision required not the second birth but first Since it ingaging to the hearts circumcision this could not bee without a second birth supposed This which hath been said accordeth with much of that which wee speake touching baptisme that it sealeth the covenant indefinitely to all sorts and that it sealeth on Infants present federall Grace and unto future grace likewise unto growne ones it sealeth personall grace lesse principally covenant grace principally From what hath beene said in this sixth proposition it appeares that the Infants of Abraham Isaac and Jacobs loynes were as well as their covenant and Church-seed as any others Gen. 17. 7. and 26. 3 4 and 28. 13 14. hence the covenant runs in the indefinite notion of seed and the same seed to which Canaan was to bee given for an outward inheritance whereof children were heires as well as parents hence upon that ground of Gods being a covenant-God to them was the injunction of their being sealed by Circumcision Gen. 17. 7 8 9 10 11 c. hence in that way is the Covenant of grace renewed to all Israel in the termes of you and your seed Deut. 30. 6. I have beene the larger in this matter of Gods covenant with the Jewes as conceiving the contrary opinion to have beene a great ground both of Anabaptisme and Familisme SECT IX The Childrens Covenant estate in Gospel Conclus 7. THat the Covenant interest at least externall and ecclesiasticall of Infants of inchurched beleevers is Gospell as well as such covenant interest of growne persons Now because Antipaedobaptists or rather Anabaptists wholly deny the Covenant-right of Infants of beleevers let us here also addesome particulars for further clearing of this proposition But first let us consider of that place Deut. 30. 6. 11 12 13 14. compared with Rom. 10. 6. 7. 8. the matter of the promise scil inward power of grace inabling to love the Lord intirely
baptizing of persons but that it may appeare that onely such were not then in the assembly albeit the growne persons were those to whom especially such speeches were directed compare this with that of Austin in his 4. Serm. in octav Paschae adneophytos where hee saith To day are celebrated the octaves of Infants their heads are uncovered in token of libertie c. Those children Infants little ones sucklings hanging on their mothers breasts and ignorant of what grace is bestowed as you may perceive because they are called Infants even they also also have their octaves to day And these old men young men striplings all are also Infants By this testimony we may perceive a larger interpretation of the word Neophytos scil any one newly planted into the Church whether Infant youth or other any one who was as new borne Sacramentally in baptisme of what age soever And that at the solemnitie of Easter * Infants sucklings were baptized as well as elder ones even before that change of the limitatiō of Baptism to Easter and and Pentecost Of which Rupertus and Boemius speake baptisme of Infants was not brought in for mortalities sake upon the change of the old use of baptisme at Easter and Pentecost but was in use while yet those limited times stood and long before this corrupt use of limiting the time of baptisme was in force of which more anon Yet also this I deny not but that corrupt addition to Paedobaptisme being in use in those times of asking questions to the child by the sureties c. this answer might suffice that even Infants too were in that number of young plants mentioned which did answer as is there said by their sureties Austin is againe quoted for proofe of the 7th Proposition de baptismo contra Donat. lib. 4. cap. 23. de Genesi ad literam lib. 10. cap. 23. now then let us examine what Austine saith there and how pertinent a proofe it is of the proposition hee calleth it there saith the Treatise a Church custome and thence concludes by the witnesse that Paededobaptisme is an ordinance of man brought into the Church by Teachers since the Apostles time and instituted by councells c. but let us heare Austin speake for himselfe at the first hand and not take a report of his words at second hand lest it prove a slander thus he speaketh in the former place the which the whole Church holdeth as delivered to it that even little Infants are baptized which truely yet cannot beleeve with the heart unto righteousnesse nor confesse with the mouth unto salvation as the Thiefe he meanes the converted Thiefe c. and yet no Christian hath affirmed that they are baptized in vaine and immediatly Chap. 24. addeth And if any seeke divine authoritie in this matter scil of Infants baptisme although that which the whole Church holdeth neither was instituted by councells but alwayes retained wee assuredly beleeve that it was not delivered but by Apostolicall authoritie yet wee may truely conjecture opposing this to all false and uncertaine conjectures of what authoritie or force the Sacrament of Infants baptisme is from circumcision c. where first in the very place quoted hee saith not that it was a tradition of the Church onely or from the Church but was delivered to the Church and least any should imagine that this was delivered to the Church by any corrupt teachers since the Apostles times Austin in the next Chapter within five or six lines of that in the 23. Chapter mentioned giveth his arguments to prove that it could not bee delivered to the Church but by Apostolicall authoritie first in that it was never instituted by any councells secondly because it was ever held by the Churches scil since there was any Church planted by the Apostles and I thinke his arguments are weightie other things which were of such note as this of Paedobaptisme was if innovations either they may bee proved that they came in by such or such councells or authors or it may be proved that there was never any such thing in use before such or such a time which in this case will be hard for any to undertake to make the same good by convincing testimonies or arguments But to returne to our Authors they bring in this testimony to prove that baptisme of Infants was instituted by councells * The first witnesse saith flatly it was not instituted by Councells what forgery is this they make him their witnesse to prove it to bee an ordinance of man the witnesse proveth that it 's of divine authoritie What notable jugling is this Will they never leave this trade Let us examine the other place where Austin saith that it is a Church custome if our Authors speake truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth of the place quoted the words there are as followeth the custome of our mother the Church in baptizing Infants is not to bee despised nor by any meanes is the same to be thought superfluous Yery good then will they say this place is full for us Nay stay Sirs be not too hasty to interrupt the witnesse whilst hee is speaking let him speake all hee hath here to say scil nor were it at all to bee beleeved unlesse it were an Apostolicall tradition c. So you heare Sirs hee tells you it 's such a Church custome as withall it is an Apostolicall tradition and that in the other place quoted is of Divine authority hee makes account which is delivered to the Church by the Apostles As indeed it is unlesse that any thinke that the Apostles in their Apostolicall ministry erred and delivered that to the Church as the mind meaning and intent of Christ which hee never meant And Austin hath the very same words as here in his third Epistle ad Yolusiam Nay lest there should bee any stick in the words traditum ab Apostolis and Apostolicall tradition hee peremptorily affirmeth speaking of the Churches authority in this case of Paedobaptisme lib. 1. de peccat merit remiss cap. 16 proculdubio per Dominum Apostolos traditum that without all question it was delivered by the Lord and his Apostles But our Authors here will not leave Austin thus but they will make him speake for them ere they have done therefore hee is quoted againe in the 28th Epistle to Jerom to confirme their 7th Proposition Content wee will heare any thing hee can say What saith Austin there Nay pag. 32. our Authors are silent and onely quote the place not the words and leave us to finde the sense out as Nebuchanezzar did his dreame and them to interpret it But let mee assure them Austin doth rather confirme the contrary in that Epistle then otherwise clearing both the spirituall ends of Christian parents in hastning with their children to Baptisme and ratifying Cyprians judgement touching the case of Paedobaptisme that hee therein did not frame some new decree but held the most firme beleefe
This argument supposeth that one cannot bee within the covenant of saving grace externally but they must bee in a saving estate the contrary whereto appeareth Conclus 3. And it 's said of sundry illegitimate Jewish children that they were within the covenant of saving grace namely externally for the author cannot meane other And yet of all such who will say they were all in a saving estate even Esaus birthright was more then right to Isaacs temporall estate as borne of Isaac why else doth the Apostle apply Esaus example of selling his birthright in such sort as Heb. 12. 15 16 17. hee propoundeth his example to deterre the Hebrewes which were in Church estate Heb. 10. 25. and 12. 17 18. from the mischiefe of falling short of the grace of God not of meere temporall blessings nay expresly the thing hee fell short of as his birth heritage as Isaacs first borne is said to bee the blessing indefinitely even Abrahams blessing to his seed the same blessing whereof hee rejecting his externall right Jacob his younger brother came to possesse which was a Church blessing as well as naturall and civill Gen. 28. 3 4. as for temporall blessings he had store of them notwithstanding nor was Isaacs trembling when hee saw how strangely God had ordered the blessing of the first borne to Jacob the younger sonne Gen. 27. occasioned from a bare disappointing him of the externall right to temporalls but withall to spiritualls and ecclesiasticall good also whence the Apostle calleth him for his contempt a prophane person Heb. 12. 3 Object But saith I. S. the covenant of grace being a covenant there must be mutuall agreement betwixt the covenanters and so knowledge and consideration of the termes thereof and restipulation as in mens covenants Hen. Den a little differently maketh a necessitie of the persons entring into covenant with God scil by faith unto covenant right and not meerely Gods entring into covenant with the creature for so hee entred into covenant with the beasts c. Gen. 9. 10. Answ To which I answer the covenant of grace is as well a testament 1 Cor. 11. Heb. 9. Now a testament may bee and useth to bee made in reference to little ones without knowledge nor doe any use to deny a childs right in the testators will because it was taken in amongst other legacies in the bequeathed legacies before it understood the same nor will it bee denyed in the case of the elect seed the choyce parties in Gods covenant Gen. 17. that they many of them dying Infants without actuall knowledge were not therefore children of the promises or that that solemne covenant Deut. 29. 9 10 11 12 13 14 15. and 30. 6 7 8 9 10 c. with that people wherein conditions also were propounded on their parts that therefore the covenant was not made betwixt the little ones there present because they neither understood nor could actually subscribe to the conditions the contrary being there expressed no rather it sufficed that the childrens covenant estate being the parents priviledge whence the incouragement to Abraham to walke with God Gen. 17. 1 c. From that amongst other incouragements that God would become his seeds God also c. vers 7. and so Deut. 29. and 30. amongst other incouragements to the parents that is one vers 6. that God will doe thus for their seed also yea the children being reckoned as in their parents as Levi payd tithes in Abraham c. yea the externall avouching in a covenant way of God being owned as the childrens Deut. 26. 16 17. yea the childrens circumcision being as well the covenant dutie Whence called the covenant or the covenant parties covenant part or dutie as well as the token of Gods covenant Gen. 9. 7. 9 10 11. they restipulate in their parents knowing acceptance of the covenant and professed owning of it upon the covenant termes as well on their childrens part as their owne and they restipulate in a passive reception of the covenant condition and bond to after imitation of their father Abrahams faith and obedience to which purpose I. S. confessed circumcision was annexed to the covenant Yea the bastard children of Iudah and Gilead and others are acknowledged to bee in the covenant of saving grace which yet could not personally restipulate in a way of actuall knowledge or faith or the like 4 Obj. Your doctrine would make God the author of sin partly in causing persons to beleeve untruths partly in promising life to the wicked and so keeping of him from returning I.S. C.B. I.S.C.B. C.B. Besides it will make every beleever an Abraham and make Christs body to consist of dead members and even confound the world and the Church as if one Answ To the first wee require the parents in reference to the Church and covenant estate of their children to make confession of their faith in the covenant of God as made with them and their seed indefinitely according as the termes of the covenant are and being the termes of the covenant it 's no untruth or sinne to beleeve it in foro dei or confesse that faith in foro Ecclesiae which of the beleevers children is elect or saved or not it 's to us a secret and our doctrine requireth them to beleeve revealed things as are those indefinite words of the covenant leaving secrets to the Lord and no other was Moses doctrine having propounded the covenant of God as with parents and children and being yet further to inlarge hee joyneth the former and latter part of his speech with that item that secret things belong to God but things revealed scil touching this his mind of grace indefinitely these are for us and for our children And for further taking off of this cavill together with the second I answer when some say that even bastard children were in the covenant of saving grace and even I. S. which objecteth the same confesseth that God promiseth to bee a God or to fulfill his promises even such as Luke 1. 74 75 c. and gave them circumcision to confirme the same on both seeds requiring them to walke in the footsteps of Abrahams faith c. I demand were the carnall seed saved I. S. will not say so yet God promised and gave circumcision as a seale to that end that hee would bee their God requiring them to beleeve c. did not then God faile in his promise or in requiring them to beleeve an untruth surely no so when they were on that ground according to I. S. to walke in the footsteps of Abrahams obedience and circumcision of heart was required of them did not this rather further then hinder their repentance is it not the Apostles argument to the Jewes to prevaile with them to repent Repent for the promise is to you c. Act. 2. 38 39. Nay doth not our doctrine holding forth the interest at least externall of such in covenant thereby hold forth as well an externall interest in that
that it came to bee used by the Fathers that lived 300. yeers after the Apostles as much saith A. R. in his Childish baptisme But say Cassander spoke as Proposition 4. hee is said to doe yet that proveth not that children of the faithfull were commonly first instructed ere baptized because some beleevers deferred baptisme or Tertullian and Gregory counselled it much lesse that this was well done according to Christs mind for wee have seene upon what unsound principles they did it and as for the Councell of Tertullian and Gregory it hath been before weighed of what force herein As for the other speech of Cassander that Pedobaptisme came in use by the Fathers 300. yeeres after the Apostles time it maketh mee stand and wonder at the impudent forehead of errour and yet I might wonder the lesse since it 's but just with God that they which hold lies should also tell lies I read Cassander with as much heed as I could to finde out whether there might bee any colour of ground of such a speech of him but could not finde out any like it unlesse that which hee saith bee this way wrested scil that the Apostles in the beginning by the command and charge of the Lord set up their worke and did every where constitute Churches gathered of the Gentiles to the Communion of the Gospel growne ones which consented to the Apostles doctrine after confession of the faith were without any distinction of times or places knit unto the Church of Christ by the Sacrament of Baptisme administred by the Disciples of the Apostles But saith also in the next words although even at that time it is to be beleeved that Infants also and especially sickly ones were offered to bee consecrated by the baptisme of Christ but clearely to evince the falsehood of that speech before cited to confirme Proposition 7. the very title of this booke contradicteth the same George Cassander of Infants baptisme The testimonies of the Ancient Ecclesiasticall writers which flourished within the 300. yeeres from the times of the Apostles that is from the departure of John the Apostles being more then the hundreth yeere from the birth of Christ And according to this his worke that hee propoundeth hee bringeth in very notable testimonies of the antients both Latine and Greeke that lived in that space for the proofe of Paedobaptisme that any that had not sâ—ene authorities before might have been thence well furnished for this purpose and after the testimonies produced Cassander closeth thus These are the testimonies of ancient Fathers which wee suppose are sufficient for the deciding of this controversie of childrens baptisme which hath been raised up by certaine wretched persons for in as much as all these whose testimonies wee have produced in a continued series from the Apostles were Orthodox teachers and guiders of Churches of Christ at severall times and places there is no question but that this Tenent being held forth by them all severally as with one mouth it was the very doctrine of the whole Church which the Church had received from the Apostles and transmitted the same to those in after times and upon the speech of Austin l. 4. contra Donat. c. 13 14. addeth To this Apostolicall doctrine of baptisme of Infants all the Apostolique Churches planted by the Apostles throughout the whole world they doe give testimony c. Who seeth not now the grosnesse of this falshood in fathering that upon Cassander the very contrary whereunto is his businesse there to evince SECT V. Zwinglius THe next testimony is of as grand an adversarie to Anabaptisme as any and that is Zuinglius who is quoted to confirme the 4th and 6th Proposition hee is said to affirme that there is no plaine word in Scripture whereby childrens baptisme is commanded his meaning is no more then thus that it is not in so many words said you shall baptize children as neither the first day of the weeke shall bee to you the Lords day or Christian Sabbath c. but the principall place and for the other two quotations they are to no purpose is that mentioned in his booke of Articles Act. 18. whose words because the treatise is so often tripping wee shall set downe verbatim who there speaking of Confirmation saith although I am not ignorant as it may bee gathered out of the Ancients that of old time Infants were baptized this is rendred otherwise in the Treatise and yet not so common as now it is but the children were alwayes instructed openly and when their faith had made impression upon their hearts and they confessed with their mouthes then they were admitted to baptisme this custome of teaching I wish were used and recalled now namely that baptisme being given to Infants they may bee afterwards taught when they come to age as they are capable of instruction from the Word of God this the Treatise leaveth out Zwinglius his judgment was that the maine in the childs right to baptisme was the Parents Covenant estate whence the child being federally holy which else had been uncleane had its maine title to baptisme so that in case both parents were visibly Pagans or Idolatrous c. they were not to bee baptized when yet in his time many such were baptized And thus I take it is that which hee intendeth that since in Ancient times albeit sometimes every little children of Infidels as may appeare were baptized yet not so commonly as now such like children are baptized promiscuously hand over head for which some as it appeares by Beza upon 1 Cor. 7. 14. have pleaded albeit hee counts it their errour ibid. and since in those times Catechising as it appeareth of children was too little in use Zwinglius maketh that use of the Catechising of children of old both of persons joyned to the Church which were capable of instruction when first their parents joyned in Church estate before their baptisme which was one sort of children so catechised and of the exposititious children of Pagans also those children of their Pagan captive or slaves which were another sort of children catechized before baptisme Zwinglius wisheth that albeit it were not in his time used as neither before baptisme to such like children so neither after the baptisme neither of such children nor of others of visible beleevers which ought in Infancy to bee baptized yet now catechizing of children might bee in more use Assuredly Zwinglius was strong for this that baptisme of Infants was no practise taken up after the Apostles but by the Apostles no bare old custome taken upon humane grounds but his judgement was directly crosse to the Proposition hee is brought as a witnesse to that Christ did not institute Infants baptisme c. witnesse his many arguments from Scripture for it and his judicious answers to the evasions of the adversaries to that truth And as much may bee said of Oecolampadius his companion who is cited to confirme the 6th Proposition whereas in the first