but gives them so high an eulogium that we may know that the initiatory seal belongeth principally to them as it did under the Law what though God name not Infants to be baptized in so many words and syllables yet seeing he neither nameth men of years nor women it must needs be that under these words all nations he comprehended all those of which nations as their integrant parts consist which are men women and children it agreeth also with the nature of the seal which is the initâ—atorie Sacrament of regeneration implantation into Christ faith mortification putting off the old mâ—n putting on Christ remission of sins deliverance from the wrath of God and curse of the Law all which is as necessâ—ry for Infants that they may be saved as for any others and into these either for present or future they are baptized 14 God ever since his covenant made with Abraham appointed Infants some seal of his covenant as well with them as theâ—r parents whereof they were some ways capable and whereby they might be externally known not only to God that they are long before any man can seal them 2 Tim. 2. 19. Tit. 1. 2. Rom. 8. 29. 9. 11. but also of men or otherwise he must have cast our Infants under the Gospel from right to the seal of his covenant which he gave them under the Law to be within Gods covenant therefore God hath appointed baptism to Infants add hereto that whereas poor Infants need mercie for remission of original sin they are not for present capable of the other ordinary means appointed persons of years as hearing the Word receiving the Lords Supper prayer repentance c. they are passively capable of baptism as under the law they were of circumcision therefore seeing remission of sin is simply necessary baptism the ordinary means thereto is necessary if it may be had 15 Whatsoever Infants of believers are capable of as interested in Gods covenant without the help of present underâ—â—anding that man ought not to bar them of but such Infants as interested in Gods covenant are capable of baptism without the present help of understanding therefore they ought not to be bar'd thereof by man The major appeareth in Infants circumcision on the eighth day that was the seal of the same faith and covenant of God in Christ and a part or condition of the same as baptism now is as hath been proved The minor appears Gen. 17. 7. I will establish my covenant between me and thee and thy seed after thee c. that is with thy Infants also as well as with thee and by vertâ—e hereof Isaac at eight dayes old received the seal of the righteousness of faith without the help of present understanding and there is the same reason of baptism in respect of Gods promise Act. 2. 39. and the alteration of the seal altereth not the covenant in subâ—â—ance subject or end I suppose all know that children of Christians without the help of present understanding are now as capable of Baptism the more easie seal as they were of Circumcision the more painful and bloody And lest any should think that this Priviledge of Infants-sealing belonged only to Abrahaâ—s Carnal-seed the Iews the Holy Ghost testifieth that they which are of the Faith the samâ— are the children of Abraham Gal. 3. 7. and again The Promise is to you and to your children and to all that are a far off even as many as the Lord our God shall call Now he hath called us Gentiles to the faith in Christ who were once a far off Therefore Infants of those who by Calling are interessed in Gods Covenant are capable of Baptism Moreover as hath been noted as the worldly wise men by the creatures Rom. 1. 21. knew God but loved him not by grace dwelling in them neither glorified him as God So these Infants may have him before they can know him that is they may be regenerate by thâ— holy Spirit before they have the use of understanding that they may know the things which are given them of God and certainly all Elect Infants though dying yong are regenerate else could they not be saved yet so young they can have no actual knowledge of their regeneration or means thereunto belonging and if they are saved and have the inward Seal of Gods Spirit how injuriously are they barred from the external seal by man To conclude Infants are interressed by Gods promise which dependeth not on any mans understanding sanctity or excellency but on the free grace of God who made this Covenant with us when we were all in the course of corrupted nature enemies without Christ aliens strangers from the Covenants of Promise having no hope and without God in the world Ephes. 2. 12. Lastly as by one mans disobedience many were made sinners and so sin is communicated to all mankinde yea to those who have not yet the use of reason for we see that Infants dye as well as old men So by one Christs Righteousness imputed many are made righteous in Baptism the Laver of Regeneration though they yet understand it not So put they on Christ though it be not yet given them to knâ—w the things which are giâ—en thâ—m of God See Argument 2. 16. The command for baptizing is for all that are to be saved But among those are many Infants therefore the command for baptizing is for Infants also or without exclusion of all Infants 17. That opinion which makes the Covenant or Priviledge of the Gospel worse to Abrahams spiritual seed then it was to his carnal is false and erroneous yea Antichristian But to deny Believers Infants baptism the initiatory Seal of the Covenant and the priviledge thereof makes this worse then that Therefore it is false c. The major is confirmed in that God avoâ—eth the Gospel to be a better Covenant then that of the Law Heb. 8. 6. The minor likewise because under the Law Infants had the priviledge of the initiatoty seal Thâ— Gospel-Covenant holdeth forth an enlargement of the signs and subject of Gods mercy It was before only to the Jews geâ—erally who had the Ordinances of Righteousness as Gideons Fleece the dew while all the floor which then figured the Gentiles was dry But now Christ saith Go Teach all nations baptizing them So far was it from diminishing or contracting the grace of God by the coming of Christ like rain into the Fleece that now he sent it to all Nations who before gave it only to one And the Covenant of God made with Abraham was testified by an external Seal to comfort Parents in assurance that God had care for and a Covenant with their children also Now they that take this away from childrâ—n under the Gospel make the Gospeâ—-Covenant much worse as being less testified then that under the Law Add hereto that the coming of Christ which set an end to Legal ceremonies and appointed Baptism diminished not
baptism but persons of years which is the question in hand and therfore may not be a medium to prove your assertion by as for asking them questions to be answered by Sponsors Godfathers and Godmothers we shall speak anon And to supply their incapacity by the answer of a Godfather is but the same unreasonableness acted with a worse circumstance and there is no sensible account to be given of it We say that by your present confession such sponsion by God-fathers is but a circumstance therefore the sponsors supply not any incapacity of infants in the respect of the substance of baptism which is to be sprinkled washed with or dipped in water in the name of the Father the Son and the holy Ghost for this their own capacity is sufficient they being born of believing parents and within the Church without the supply of any answer of others for them which if you grant us we have the end of our dispute as for circumstances neither commanded nor forbidden by God in the holy scriptures we shall willingly submit to the authority and practice of the Church in which we live If you dispute from the circumstance or any pretended inconvenience therein to the anulling the substance controverted you know how unreasonable that fallacia accidentis is and what sensible account can be given of it But you say That which some imperfectly murmur concerning stipulations civil performed by Tutors in the name of their Pupils is an absolute vanity c. Have a care that you be not answered with à turpe est Doctori c. Do you not vainly argue that in the use of God-fathers c. God is tyed and Christian Religion transacts her mysteries by proportion and compliance with the Law of the Romans concerning which something hath been answered before I only add here that God neither commanding nor forbidding God-fathers it is no vanity to obey authority herein But to disturb the peace of the Church and make schismes for things in their own nature indifferent and commended to us by venerable antiquity is not only vain but impious And how is God tyed where he neither forbids nor commands To the rest we say not that Christian Religion must transact her mysteries by complyance with Roman Laws or humane customs but that in some things she may in things circumstantial and no waies repugnant to the word of God You say further I know God might if he would have appointed God-fathers to gâ—ve answer in behalf of children and to be fideiussors for them but we cannot find any authority or ground that he hath and if he had then it is to be supposed he would have given them commission to have transacted the solemnity with better circumstances and given answers with more truth We answer 1. In that you can find no authority or ground for it nor against it as we know it can be no other then adiaphorous or indifferent and in or for such things as are meerly circumstantial and in their own nature indifferent to dissent from antiquity disobey the Churches authority and break the sacred band of unity let your own consciences tell you what you do 2. Whereas you would bespatter this custom of imputation of will-worship and untruth in the users thereof I say first That whatsoever God hath commanded or forbidden in holy Scriptures that is necessarily to be observed and this faithfull word we must hold fast Tit. 1. 9. But those things which he hath neither commanded nor forbidden neither expresly nor by necessary consequence fall under the general rule belonging to things arbitrary and indifferent Let all things be done decently and in order â— Cor. 14 4â— which then only can be when we unanimously and uniformly do that which a general consent and constant practice of the Church warranteth not that which every private spirit liketh or disliketh There can be no decency without order nor order in confusion of practices therefore God having left many things circumstantial arbitrary as to the authority of the Church we ought to tender her unity and reverence her authority the contempt whereof hath opened so wide a dore to schism as now troubleth the Christian world Secondly there may be falshood in some mens answers though no fault in the order which God will it being his perfection that he is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 God that cannot lie Tit. 1. 2. and it is the inviolable holyness of his will that he will not neither can will any evil and it is certainly true which Fulgentius saith As there is no sin in him so there is no sin of him For the question you say is asked of believing in the present and if the God-fathers answer in the name of the child I do believe it is notorious that they speak false and ridiculously for the infant is not capable of believing c. For answer we may say with Augustin Who knows not that to be baptized is in or for infants instead of believing And again they are borne to Church and although they cannot run thither on their own feet yet go they on others feet that they may be healed our mother the Church lendeth them others feet that they may come others heart that they may believe others tongue that they may confess that for as much as in that they are sick they are more grievously burthened with anothers sin that is which they acted not in their own persons so when these are cured they may be healed or saved another confessing for them But I demand Why may we not here with better reason understand present for future believing then you do children of believersâ— holyness which the Apostle 1 Cor. 7. 14. pronounceth in the present by a designation to the service of Iesus Christ and the future participation of the promises But Augustin saith very well If the Sacraments had not a certain similitude of those things whereof they are Sacraments they should not at all be Sacraments but by reason of this likeness they oftentimes receive the very names of these things themselves therefore as after a certain manner the Sacrament of Christs body is the body of Christ the Sacrament of Christs blood is the blood of Christ so the Sacrament of faith is faith Now to believe is nothing else but to have faith and so when 't is answered that the infant believeth who hath not yet the affection of faith we answer that the hath faith in respect of the sacrament of faith and that he converteth to God in respect of the sacrament of conversion because even that very answer appertaineth unto the celebration of the Sacrament as the Apostle speaketh of baptism it self We are saith he Buried with him by baptism into death he saith not we signifie burial but altogether saith We are buried therefore he called the Sacrament of so great a matter by no other name then of the thing it self So that faith though it be not yet such as
them There appears neither act nor habit of regeneration in Infant-baptism until they be taught the Word neither any more promptitude to learn it then is in unbaptized children coming to years therefore their baptism is effectless and consequently unlawful We answer 1 The Kingdom of God cometh not with observation Luk. 17. 20. and the internal acts of the Spirit are secret for what man knoweth the things of a man save the spirit of a man which is within him 1 Cor. 2. 11. 2 If outward appearance be a good argument to the denying of internal acts and habits you might by the same medium as well conclude that Infants are not reasonable creatures Infants inspired by Gods Spirit may be said to be Believers as they are said truly to be rationals that is actuprimo non secundo and they confess and avouch the Lord in their Parents avouching of him as appeareth Deut. 26. 16 17 18. Deut. 29. 9 10 1â— 12 13 14 15. 3 It is not true that baptized Infants have no more promptitude to learn the mysteries of salvation when they come to years to be taught then other unbaptized children have caeteris paribus for the H. Ghost doth not desert his own ordinance in the Elect though for causes very just yea when most unknown to us it doth not alwayes alike shew its power as for the reprobate the seal or administration of man can nothing profit him who abuseth it and where God ever denyeth inward baptism by his holy Spirit of sanctification Reprobates who cannot be profited by baptism ought not to be baptized lest we add to their condemnation but of Infants some are such and we cannot say which of them offered to baptism is elect and which not therefore seeing we cannot distinguish them nor can they express themselves we ought not to baptize them untill they can We answer If the major proposition in this argument be universalis negans it is most false for Simon Magus and Iudas who were not profited by their baptism were yet rightly baptized If particular though granted it would conclude nothing against Infant-baptism for by the same reason they may deny baptism to persons of years for alas many of them are Reprobates Neither can any meer man distinguish between the one and the other seeing that whatever profession of faith and repentance men make 't is possible they may dissemble or fall away Now we in charitie hope the best where the contrary is not manifest and therefore deny them not baptism who doe but profess faith repentance and desire of baptism and if we can have as much charitie to innocent Infants we must also allow them baptism who being born of Christian parents are within Gods covenant of Grace And indeed the final estate of Infants or aged people being alike secret and known to God alone we must perform our ministrie respectively and leave the fruit and issue thereof to God so in preaching the Gospel the sincere Milk of the Word 1 Pet. 2. 2. we do often as it were draw out the brest like the mother of the living child 1 King 3. 20 21. to some dead in belief sins and trespasses laid in our bosome who know not who shall profit by it nor to whom it shall prove a favour of death unto death that must be left to God but we must instantly preach the Gospel When the Eunuch said to Philip Act. 8. 36 see here is water what doth let me to be baptized be answered If thou believest with all thy heart thou mayest therefore he that believeth not may not be baptized such are Infants We answer 1 It is manifest enough that Philip spake to a man who could hear and read and was then something instructed in the Gospel of Christ what doth this concern Infants 2 Infants have now as much capacitie of baptism as under the Law they had of circumcision both had faith as reason in the feed though not in the fruit and the sacrament of baptism now performeth the same to us which circumcision did to them as that was to them a sign of their receiving into the Church and people of God so is baptism to us the first mark which severeth and distinguisheth the people of God from the prophane and wicked aliens Faith ought not to be separated from the seal thereof therefore Infants who cannot actually beleeve ought not to be baptized until they can See what hath been said Obj. 12. to which we here add that this proposition is true concerning persons of years but concerneth not Infants in whom we cannot know Gods present work but in baptism the seed of faith regeneration mortification and newness of life is sowed in them and all know that precedence concludeth not separation Lastly we say that if faith and baptism must so indivisibly be united as that none may be baptized but they who do actually believe whom might our adversaries baptize or whom put by though of years If they say they profess faith there is much difference between professing and actual believing and I much fear that many will too late find as much distance between justifying faith and temptation of securitie as is between heaven and hell Such are to be baptized as confess their sins Mat. 3. 6. as gladly receive the Word Act. 2. 41. as give heed to the Word preached Act. 8. 6. but this Infants cannot do therefore they are not to be baptized We answer The affirmative may from such places be concluded Such ought to be baptized but the negative cannot therefore none but men so qualified may be baptized it no more followeth then if you should say Cornelius and those that were with him when Peter preached received the holy Ghost in the extraordinary gifts thereof therefore none but such as have received the extraordinary gifts of the holy Ghost may be baptized nay but though it wel concluded affirmatively for them that they were to be baptized it cannot conclude negatively against others that they may not be baptized who have not received such gifts If baptizing Infants be grounded on circumcision the males only must be baptized but that is not true for females also ought to be baptized We answer Here is a fallacia accidentis an arguing from the substance to the circumstance whereas baptism succeeded circumcision in substance not in every circumstance The substance was that was a seal of faith and Church-priviledge so is this that was administred to all that would join in the faith of Abraham and their children as being in Gods covenant so must it be here in that was sealed to the Covenanter the promise of grace and mercie by Christ which is alwayes one and the same so here that signified mortification and a promise on mans part of faith and obedience to God so it is here that was the inlet to Gods Church the Sacrament of initiation admission and engraffing into the Church so is baptism
the grace of his Father in the Signs and Dispensations thereof making it more dark or less testified by a Seal towards those who are within the Covenant of Grace but rather encreased or communicated it more clearly and therein it is a better Covenant Hebr. 8. 6. not in respect of God the appointer thereof he is one and the same for ever not in respect of Christ the Mediator he is the same under the Law and Gospel but in respect of the exhibition of things promised and shadowed out in the Law and clearer manifestation of Gods grace and truth in Christ. Now they who deny Infants of believers the initiatory seal of Gods Covenant as much as in them lieth diminish the grace of God and make the Covenant seem worse by Christs coming in that they diminish the comfortable assurance of our childrens implantation into Christ and of his care of and favour to them if they may not so much as be marked with the external sign and seal thereof which yet elect and reprobates if of years may by your leave and do receive 18. That which is evil to be done is forbidden in some express and known Law and Word of God But Infant-baptism is forbidden in no express and known Law and word of God therefore it is not evil as our Antagonists would make the world believe 19. That whereof God will severely punish the contempt or neglect we must not omit But God will severely punish the contempt or neglect of his Covenant of grace and mercy whereof Baptism is a part or condition as well with Infants as persons of years therefore we may not omit it See Gen. 17. 14. Exod. 4. Mark 16. 16 Hebr. 10. 28 29. and that being supposed which hath hitherto been proved that Infants of Church-priviledged Parents ought to be baptized the Minister who upon such fancies and unsufficient grounds as are alledged by our Antagonists refuseth to baptize them or the Parent who will not have them baptized must needs be under â— woful condition the Apostles argument being good from the dispensation of the Gospel committed to him to the necessary administration of the same as in preaching the word so in the seals thereto belonging whereof he expresly saith 1 Cor. 9. 16. Wo is unto me if I preach not the Gospel For though his principal and first office was to preach as being appointed the Doctor of the Gentiles first to be taught and then respectively to be baptized yet it is manifest that the Dispensation of Baptism the seal of the Gospel and Covenant of God in Christ went along in charge with preaching of the same and was committed to the Apostles and all Ministers their Successors and so woe will be to them if they baptize not where Christ intended the seal of his Grace as surely as if they preach not the Gospel 20. They are to be held as Heathens and Publicans who refuse to hear and obey the Church of Christ But such are Anabaptists nor is it any excuse but an aggravation of their sin to bespatter the Church with impious calumnies It had been and ever was as easie for all sorts of hereticks in and since Christ and the Apostles time and in the purest ages of the primitive Church to have said for a pretended defence of their errour and contumacy you are not the true Church but in spight of Satan and the powers of hel we are through the mercy of God a member of the true Church of Christ therefore their schism contempt is the more condemnable 21. Those to whom the things signified belong unto them belong also the signs and seals thereof except in case of some apparent condition making an evident exception as want of ability to examine themselves barreth Infants from the holy Eucharist But the thing signified by Baptism belongs to Infants and there is no apparent condition making any evident exception to bar them from it therefore Baptism belongeth to them The things signified by Baptism are that we are thereby received into Gods favour for the blood of Christ shed for us to binde us to a sincere obedience to faith and endeavour to newness of life Gods promise of grace and mercy in Christ marking us for sheep of his pasture our puting on Christ regeneration washing from our sins justification salvation by Christ these things belong to all the elect whereof Infants of Believers are a very considerable part And these things are held forth in Baptism as things signified in the sign by God appointed to all receivers sacramentally and to an external communion of which lambs aswel assheep Infants aswel as the aged are capable Therefore Baptism belongeth to Infants of Christian Pâ—rents 22. To whom the Covenant in force runneth in the same tenour in the new Testament as in the old to such persons the application of the Initiatory seal of the new Testament ought to be administred as well as was the Initiatory seal of the old But the Covenant in force runs in the same tenour c. therefore the Initiatory seal of the Covenant ought now to be administred to such persons as the Initiatory seal of the Covenant was administred to in the old The tenor of the Covenant was to Parents and their children upon condition that they should be sealed according to the promise that God would be their God who would observe the Laws and conditions thereof the same is still for substance in force though the seals are changed So that as Infants were circumcised so ought they now to be baptized and except this be allowed to our Infants as well as to our selves believing in Christ we are not as the Apostle affirms Col. 2. 10. Compleat in him In whom we are circumcised with the Circumcision made without hands Buried with him in Baptism c. Nor are we and our children so sealed into our implantation into the death of Christ that we may in the ordinary way thereby be assured that as he put off the infirm affections of the natural body so we put off the body of sin spiritually See Rom. 6. 3 c. 23. Such persons as were typically baptized unto Moses are capable of the real and true baptism under the Gospel of Christ For in the main the argument holds from the type to the truth though possibly not in every circumstance But children as well as persons of years were baptized in the cloud and in the red-sea unto Moses 1 Cor. 10. 2. and their washing with rain from the cloud prefigur'd our washing in Baptism and by the Spirit therefore children of covenanted persons are capable of the true and real Baptism under the Gospel of Christ. 24. Where there is a command for a thing never remanded or countermanded there that thing is still in force But there is a command for the signing of Infants of Believers with the sign of Gods Covenant with their Parents and them never yet remanded or countermanded