2. Saith he If it be called the Baptism of Repentance for the remission of sins because men by taking up that Ordinance do ingage themselves to the practice of repentance and mortification as the Apostle supposeth the beleeving Romans Mr. A. p. 15. 16. to have done Rom. 6. 2 to 6. By the way what need we an IF If it be called c. if the Apostle hath determined the case then this end is better provided for in the baptism of men then of Infants Surely Circumcision under the Law was an ingagement unto men to the practise of repentance and mortification as well as Baptism under the Gospel And yet God judged this end of it better serv'd and answered by the administration of it unto Infants then unto men otherwise we presume he would have prescribed the Administration of it unto men rather then unto children That men were ingaged by their being Circumcised unto the practise of Repentance and Mortification I suppose is no mans doubt or question If it be resolution in aboundance on that hand we speak of may be had Deut. 10. 16. Jer. 4. 4. Rom. 2. 28 29. Phil. 3. 3. besides some other places Therefore unless Mr. A. can give us some better reason then God himself knew any in the like case why a Baptismall engagement unto Repentance and Mortification should be better provided for by the baptising of men then of children it concerns him to retract his assertion in this behalf But 3. The reason or rather vice-reason which he gives of such his assertion is because an engagement to practise repentance supposeth 1. An end of Repentance 2. A capacity of performing that to which they do ingage neither of which are to be found in Infants c. I answer Sect. 65. 1. An engagement to practise Repentance by those who were circumcised supposed as much an end of repentance as it doth in those who are baptised and so likewise a capacitie to perform that which was engaged unto yet these neither divisim nor conjunctim were judged any reason by God why Infants ought not to be circumcised But the wisdom it seems of men re-baptized is super-infinite 2. I confesse I do not understand what he meaneth when he affirmeth that an end of repentance is not to be found in infants but in men And therefore reverencing that saying of the wise man He that answereth a matter before he heareth i. understandeth it it is folly and shame unto him I shall make no further answer at present unto it but this viz. that when Mr. A. shall enable me to understand how the end of repentance is in men and not in children I shall freely give him my sense of his notion 3. Nor is Mr. A. a friend either unto reason or to the truth in affirming that there is no capacitie in children of performing that to which they do ingage For 1. in such a sense as there is a capacitie in them to engage unto any thing there is likewise to perform Children are in as good and proper a capacitie to perform that which is or ought to be ingaged unto in Baptim as to make the engagement it self Secondly though children be not in a present actuall or immediate capacitie to perform that which Baptism engageth unto yet are they in a remote and mediate capacity hereof and which by the use of means and blessing of God upon these means may in due time become actuall Nor can I think that all those who according to Mr. A's notion are or have been duly baptized have been in an actuall and present capacitie at the time of their baptizing to perform every Luke 3. 13. thing they engaged unto by being baptized They who as yet doubted whether John was the Messiah or no were not in a present or immediate capacitie of beeleeving Christ to be this Messiah yet were they ingaged by their being baptized to beleeve this and notwithstanding their actuall incapacitie of beleeving it were lawfully baptized So likewise they who think they truly beleeve and are supposed by others to beleeve accordingly and yet both these suppositions notwithstanding do not truly beleeve may and ought neverthelesse to be baptized yet are they in no actuall capacitie to perform that to which they engage by being baptized I mean to beleeve in Jesus Christ and to persevere beleeving unto the end Yea Mr. A. himself by being baptized ingaged to a perseverance in Faith and holinesse unto the end of his dayes yet was he not at the time of his baptism in an actuall capacitie to perform that which he engaged unto in this kind For a present standing in Grace or Faith is no more an actuall capacitie of persevering in either to the end of a mans life then a present healthfull state or condition of the body is an actuall capacitie of preserving himself in health untill he dieth or then the present possession of an estate worth 1000. l. per annum is an actuall capacitie in the possessor of paying a debt of a 1000. or 2000 l. twenty years after So then the difference which Mr. A. pretends to finde in the consideration before us between men and children in reference unto Baptism is altogether inconsiderable and turns to no account at all for the support of his cause Whether this second consideration which he supposeth may be the reason why Baptism is termed the Baptism of repentance for remission of sins be consistent with the first I shall not trouble the Reader to discusse but rather desire him to consider But Sect. 66. 3. He advanceth in his supposals about the businesse in hand thus p. 16. If it be called the Baptism of Repentance for the Remission of sins because God thereby signifies and SEALS unto men the remission of their sins upon their repentance this end and use likewise is BETTER answered in mens Baptism who do repent then in Infants who do not c. I answer 1. His conceit of any End or Vse of Baptism better answered in the baptism of men then of Infants hath been again again put to rebuke by the consideration of the Counsell of God himself in circumcision We shall not need to repeat the consideration here There was everywhit as much reason why it might have been said in the dayes of Circumcision that such such an End or Vse of Circumcision is better answered by the circumcising of men then of infants as it can be said under the Gospel that any End or Vse of Baptism is better answered by the baptizing of Men then of Children But 2. When he saith that the End of Baptism so with some regret of jealousie supposed by him is BETTER answered by the baptizing of men then of children doth he not very plainly imply and grant that this End is competently at least answered in the baptizing of children also If so then certainly the baptizing of children is neither a nullitie nor yet a thing unlawfull But this consequence the
made by it viz. that the persons baptized look for remission of sins upon their repentance Therefore no such profession or declaration as this is made by baptism unto the world and consequently this is no end of baptism To what purpose then doth he pretend that it is better answered in the baptism of men then of Infants Sect. 73. Whreas he saith that men are capable of making such a profession and declaration of themselves to the world IN and BY their Baptism when as infants are altogether uncapable of doing any such thing I answer 1. That men themselves are very ill capable of making that profession he speaks of or any other in their Baptism 1. during the time of their being under water 2. As uncapable altogether are they of making either the one or the other BY their Baptism A man cannot professe or declare that BY baptism at least orderly regularly which God never intended should be professed or declared by it Now Mr. A. himself speaks doubtingly whether such a profession and declaratin as we now speak of be any end of baptism or no. If they be not a negative already proved by us as well as questioned or doubted by him then can they not by any man be made by it 3. There is very seldom much of the world for the most part nothing at all present at the baptizing of those who Mr. A. here supposeth should make the profession and declaration which he speaks of in and by their Baptism In what capacitie then are they of making them unto the world at such a time 4. And lastly for this though they who are baptized men are able to make what professions or declarations by words they please about the time of their baptism which infants at the time of their Baptism by themselves or in their own persons cannot yet he that offereth his Infant unto baptism and so he that baptizeth it may at this very time make the same whether professions or declarations with men And how or why such a profession and declaration as he speaketh of made by these persons when an infant is baptized should not as well answer and accommodate that end of Baptism if such it be which he here suggesteth at least in reference to the world as the like made by other men when they are baptized I verily understand not Truly these arguments are no honour or strength to the cause of Antipedo-baptism 5. He yet supposeth once more If it be called the Baptism of repentance c. because it seals and confirms the Covenant or promises of God made to men touching the remission of their sins upon their repentance yet this end and use Mr. A. p. 16 17. also is attained upon far BETTER TERMS in the Administration of Baptism to believers and to men of understanding then it is or can be when administred unto Infants who have neither I answer Sect. 74. 1. This fift and last IF is the same in substance and import and partly in words also with the third Wherefore to avoid Repetitions the Reader is desired to re-peruse the preceding 67 68 c. Sections where he shall find the impertinencie of the contents of it argued and discovered And 2. Whereas he here pleads that If the intent of God in making Baptism a seal of his Covenant and Promise is not to make his Covenant more sure in it self but to give it a more sure stable and unquestionable being in the minds and apprehensions of men then this end cannot be attained in infants by their Baptism because they want the use and exercise of their reasons judgements c. without which the articles and terms of Gods Covenant will never take place or have a being in the minds of any by way of beleef doth he not again put the wisdom of God to rebuke in his counsell and Ordinance of Circumcision For whatsoever Covenant or Promise it was which he intended to seal thereby it was no whit more to make it more sure in it self but only in the minds and apprehensions of men then his intent is to make that Covenant and Promise sure which he sealeth by Baptism and yet we know and it hath been oft noted that he judged his end in this kind as wel or rather better attained by the application of that seal unto Infants then unto men But God and Mr. A. it seems are divided in their respective senses upon the case 3. And lastly for this be it granted that without the use and exercise of mens reasons and judgments the Articles and terms of Gods Covenant will never take place or have a being in the minds of any c. yet this is no reason at all why such a Seal by which i. by the knowledge and consideration of which God intends to give being or a more sure being to the said Articles in the minds and and apprehensions of men should not be administred or applied but only where there is an actuall and present use and exercise of these faculties a See more of this Sect. 71. Especially this is no reason why this administration should not be made in the case mentioned when there are reasons why it should be made which is the case in infant-Infant-Baptism as it was also in infant-Infant-Circumcision What these reasons are I mean why the Seal of Baptism should be adminstred unto Infants we shall God willing declare in due time By the way Mr. A. seems to be a man of more then ordinary foresight in delivering himself so provisionally under the protection of so many IFS touching his sence why Baptism may be called the Baptism of repentance for the remâ—ssion of sins For hereby he seems to foresee that by that time he had travelled a little further in his discourse he should start a better reason of that Denomination then any of those now offered by the shaking hand of any of his IF 'S We shall hear of this in due time 3. Mr. A. in his progresse acquainteth us with another SEEMING end of Baptism Another end of Baptism saith he p. 17. SEEMS to be this viz. that such who are baptized might thereby signifie their acceptance of and consent unto the terms of the Gospel or Covenant of Grace But the substance of this seemingness we had lately under the conduct of the fourth IF p. 16. and in part also of the first IF p. 15. And if the Reader desires further satisfaction herein he is desired to repair back to the rifling of the two said IFS Sect. 60 61 c. and Sect. 72 73 c. Sect. 75. Nor doth he tell us any news when he addeth For the Covenant of God with men doth consist of certain articles to be observed and kept by each partie covenanting as covenants among men generally dc But this old story it may be makes way to a new Therefore he steereth on his course thus And as amongst men parties covenanting are wont to signifie their mutuall consent to
an argument as well against the câ—rcumcising of Infants under the Law as against the Baptism of Infants under the Gospell because there is the same reason to suppose that circumcision should have lesse answered the ends thereof when applied to Infants as there is to conceive that Baptism should lesse answer its ends when it is applied to Infants and yet we well know that this was no barre to Infant-circumcision then and therefore why should it be any against their Baptism now This argument or Objection is the great dread and abhorring of Mr. A's soul fearing it seems least his second argumeÌ„t against infant-Infant-Baptism should die by the hand of it And the truth is that were it yet alive he had reason enough for such his fear but we have seen it a dead corps already a body of words without any soul of sound reason or truth in it And how vain a thing is it to be solicitous about the rescue of a dead mans life from the hand of an enemie Nor is it so proper when a man hath lost his life by one hand for any man to undertake to prove that had he escaped this hand yet he would have fallen by another Notwithstanding since we have in our canvasse of the said argument now and then intersprinkled somewhat of that notion I mean about the proportion between Infant-circumcision and infant-Infant-Baptism the disparagement whereof Mr. A. here undertaketh let us see Mr. A's Objection and his Answer play a little before us Sect. 121. His objection as ye have heard pleads that there is the same reason to suppose that circumcision should have lesse answered the ends thereof when applied to Infants as there is to conceive that Baptism should lesse answer its ends when applied unto Infants c. This Mr. A's answer denieth and no marvell for what should it else do unlesse it meant to be an answer by concession only But nothing is more easie then to denie but in many cases to give a substanticall account of a mans deniall hic labor hoc opus est this will trie the ingenuitie and strength of a man And at this turn Mr. A. with his Answer faileth For of all the three Grounds or Reasons which he commendeth unto us for that his deniall there is none competent to justifie it First be saith p. 26. that Circumcision and the Covenant to which it related remained in the flesh of him who was circumcised all the dayes of his life as visible to him and as capable of improvement to spirituall ends many years after it was made as if it had been but newly acted and done before his eyes Whereas Baptism is a transient act and leaves no such visible impression in the Infant as matter of memoriall signification or instruction unto him when he comes to be a man as that of Circumcision did So that wâ— see there is not the like reason but an apparent difference in this respect But for answer to this 1. The remaining of Circumcision in the flesh of the circumcised as matter of memoriall significâ—tion c. could be no reason why Infants were appointed by God to be circumcised Because had men only been circumcised their circumcision would have remained every whit as much or rather more in their flesh and have been altogether as competent matter of memoriall signification and instruction unto them as now it was being received in their infancie Nor was it any advantage unto them by way of memoriall signification c. during all the time of their infancie or untill they came to years of discretion So that in this respect the end of Baptism by way of memoriall signification instruction c. is as well answered as fully attained by the baptizing of Infants as the same or like end of Circumcision was attained by the circumcising of Infants Sect. 122. 2. Whereas he saith that Circumcision remained in the flesh as visible to him that was circumcised c. If he would be understood generally and with reference to all persons whatsoever that were circumcised I know not what ground he hath so to affirm For what thinks he of the circumcisioÌ„ in the flesh of Isaac after his eys were dim that he could not see Gen. 27. 1. so of the circumcision of him that was born blind Joh. 9. were these visible unto them There is the same consideration of the Circumcisions of all that were blinde among the Jews Besides if it be supposed that there were any men in this Nation as corpulent as Eglon Judg. 3. 17. seems to have been their circumcision was hardly visible unto them unlesse haply by reflexion in a looking glasse And yet doubtlesse the Circumcision of all these was as competent matter of memoriall signification c. unto them as the circumcision of those to whom it was visible Therefore Baptism though not visible in the flesh to the Baptized may notwithstanding be as pregnant matter of memoriall signification c. unto them as Circumcision was at least unto many notwithstanding any such visibilitie in it as Mr. A. pretendeth 3. Neither doth the Scripture any where insist upon any such visibilitie of Circumcision as any such advantage unto the circumcised as Mr A. conceiteth nor doth God any where exhort counsell or command any circumcised person to look with the eyes of his flesh upon his circumcision either to he put in mind of or to be instructed in any thing signified thereby Therefore an externall visibilitie is no Scripture-difference between Circumcision and Baptism nor indeed is it in it self any such difference which should make the former any whit more spiritually advantagious unto the subject thereof then the latter Baptism unto its subject So that this difference is only an impertinent shift thought upon and talked of by the adversaries of Infant-Baptism to relieve their cause against such an argument which grindeth it to powder 4. Whereas Mr. A. advanceth his discourse in the point in hand in these words p. 26. Nor can it be truly said that either the report of Parents or neighbours or any Parish or other Register is or can be equivalent unto the sign in the flesh before mentioned as to the ascertaining of men and women of their being baptized in their infancie 1. because there is not the like certaintie nor satisfaction in reports and hear sayes as there is in seeing and beholding which difference notwithstanding we have in the two cases in hand 2. Because opportunity of such satisfaction as these reports are capable of giving may be cut off by the death or other removall of such from whom it is to be received or else by the removall of such Infants themselves into places far remote before ever they came to age c. he only seweth a few fig-leaves together to cover the nakednesse of his cause For Sect. 123. 1. In the beginning of this transcription he reproacheth that Law of the living God established by him long since under Moses and repeated by
it self Therefore if the uncircumcision shall keep the righteousnesse of the law shall not his uncircumsion be counâ—ed for circumcision i. shall he not be equall in account with God with him that is circumcised though as righteous as he Rom. 2. 26. in like manner if he who verily thinks he hath been baptized shal as really coÌ„scieÌ„tiously perform all the ingagemeÌ„ts which Baptism imposeth upon men shall not his non-baptism be counted Baptism unto him and for any matter of benefit which Mr. A. can pretend should accrue unto a person actually baptized by means of this his Baptism the same or as much questionlesly shall be conferred by God upon him in whom he findeth a willing heart ready mind to be baptized and who refraineth from being actually baptized only out of conscience towards God and fear of offending him Sect. 125. Whereas Mr. A. pretendeth that opportunitie of satisfaction by the means specified touching mans having been baptized may be cut off by the death or other removal of such from whom it is to be received or else by the removall of such Infants themselves into places faâ—re remote before they come to age c. answer in part hath been made already where it was shewed that little or no inconvenience accrueth unto any man by his not having been baptized in case he be verily perswaded that he hath been baptized and with all is inwardly and cordially willing and readie to be baptized in case he deemed himself unbaptized I here adde 1. That in case the generall usage and custome of the Church or People of God in any place be to baptize their children though all ocular witnesses as Parents neighbours kindred c. of the baptizing of any person should be cut off by death or however yet the known custome of the place is securitie in abundance to such a person that he hath been baptized Therefore Mr. A's supposall in the case before us is impertinent and slight And 2. The course which Mr. A. himself steers with his children I mean in not causing them to come unto Christ in Baptism the more generall practise of the Churches and people of God in the Nation which stands for baptizing children considered is farre more likely in case of his removal by death or of his childreÌ„s removal into places far remote before they come to age to deprive them of all means of satisfactioÌ„ touching their baptizing then the baptizing of children in a coÌ„currence w ith the generall practise of the Saints where they were born is to draw them into a snare of uncertaintie whether they were baptized or no whatsoever may befall to disadvantage them in this kind For in case the Parents of Mr. A's children shall be both dead before they the said children come to age what means is there for them to receive satisfaction whether they were baptized or no 3. And lastly according to M. A's own principles it is little or nothing materiall wheither a person being come to years of understanding knoweth that he was baptized in infancie or no. For in case he were baptized this Baptism with Mr. A. was but a nullitie and consequently the person remains notwithstanding this Baptism unbaptized and in case he were not then Baptized he is but in the self same condition Sect. 126. All these particulars duly weighed and considered it is too evident to be denied by any but those that will not see that Mr. A. had very small reason to affirm that there is not as good reason for the baptizing of Infants as there was for their circumcising only because circumcision was no transient thing but permanent in the flesh whereas Baptism is transient and leaves no visible impression in the flesh of the Infant and that he might with as much reason argue thus there was not the same reason why Matthew should be an Evangelist which there was for Luke because Matthew had sometimes been a Publican whereas Luke was a Physitian or thus there is not the same reason why Maâ—y should be saved which there is why Lazarus should be saved because Lazarus is a man whereas Mary is a woman These are very genuine parallels of Mr. A's reasoning in the first point of difference assigned by him between the Circumcising of Infants and their baptizing Nor doth he quit himself any whit more like a man in his second the tenour hereof being this p. 27. 2. I answer yet further that the end of Circumcision though administred to infants was better attained then the end of Baptism can be when it is so applied because much of the benefit of Circumcision did accrue to the circumcised upon the work done without respect to any inward qualification or endowment whereas the benefit of Baptism doth not accrue meerly upon the work done but is suspended upon the knowledge faith c. of him that is baptized This somewhat also being cast up amounts to just nothing For 1. The main hinge upon which this peiece of discouse turneth is crazie and crakt quite thorow For it is a not orious untruth that much of the benefit of Circumcision did accrue to the circumcised upon the work done Against such a notion as this the Scripture riseth up like an armed man For Circumcision saith the Apostle verily profiteth if thou keep the Law but if thou be a breaker of the Law thy circumcision is made uncircumcision Rom. 2 25 If much of the benefit of Circumcision did accrue to the circumcised meerly upon the work done Circumcision would have profited them and that to a considerable degree whether they had kept the Law i. the rest of the Law or no. And Circumcision would have been not only that in the heart but that which was outward also in the flesh which notwithstanding the Apostle ver 28. 29. denieth it to be Yea 2. It is so far from being true that much of the benefit of Circumcision did accrue to the circumcised upon the work done that without righteousnesse and worthy walking it rendered the Circumcised so much the more obnoxious to the displeasure and judgement of God And shall not uncircumcision saith the Apostle which is by nature if it fulfill the Law judge thee who by the letter and Circumcision dost transgresse the Law Rom. 2. 27. Yea Sect. 127. 2. Such observations of the Law from whence there is much more reason and likelyhood that much benefit should have accrued to the observers upon the work done then from Circumcision upon these terms were yet so farre from being beneficiall unto them upon any such account that they were an hatred and abomination unto God To what purpose is the multitude of your sacrifices When you come to appear before me who hath required this at your hands to tread in my courts Bring no more oblations incense is an abomination unto me The new moons and Sabbaths the calling of assemblies I cannot away with your new moons and your appointed feasts my soul hateth c. Isa 1.
See Sect. 56 73. and elâ—ewhere 4. Whereas Mr. A. makes the weaknesse and unprofitablenesse of the Commandemenâ— i. the Law for which the Apostle saith it is dâ—sannulled to stand in this or at least to comprehend it that it injoyned an Ordinance one or more to be administred to little children 1. herein he makes himself wise about that which is written the Scripture no where placing any degree or part of the weaknesse or unprofitablenesse of the Law in any such thing Nay 2. The enjoyning of an Ordinance circumcision by name to be administred unto little Children was so farre from being any part of the weaknesse and unprofitablenesse af the Law that it was a materiall veyne or part of that strength or profitablenesse that was in it For weaknesse und unprofitablenesse are not simply and absolutely ascribed unto the Law but comparatively only viz. in respect of the superabundant strength and beneficialnesse of the Gospell otherwise in simple coÌ„sideration the law was excellently beneficial of great power to advance the peace coÌ„forts and salvation of men The Scripture giveth large and frequent Testimonie hereunto He sheweth his word saith David unto Jacob his statutes and his judgements unto Israel He hath not dealt so with any nation and as for his judgments they have not known them a Psal 147 19 20. The Law of the Lord is perfect converting the soul the Testimonies of the Lord are sure making wise the simple The Statutes of the Lord are right reâ—oycing the heart the commandement of the Lord is pure enlightning the eyes the judgements of the Lord are true and righteous altogether b Psal 19. 7. 8 9. So the Apostle what advantage then hath the Jew Or what profit is there of Circumcision Much every way chiefly because that unto them were committed the Oracles of God c Ro. 3. 1 2. Read and consider at your leasure Deut. 4. 5 6 7 8. Rom. 9. 4. Psal 119. 72 98 111. to omit other places of the same purport without number Now then this is that which I say and affirm viz. that the administration of the Ordinance of Circumcision unto Infants or the injunction hereof was a part of that wisdom of that excellencie of that profitablenesse which were found in the Law and did contribute its proportion of efficacie together with the rest of the branches and precepts of the Law towards the blessed effect mentioned by David of converting the souls of men And doubtlesse there would have been a greater weaknesse and defectivenesse in the Law in respect of this and such like gracious effects had the precept or commandment of circumcision been otherwise framed then now it was and the standing administration of it injoyned to be made unto men Sect. 134. The Premises considered I suppose the Reader cannot lightly but think that Mr. A. was farre better conceited then he of his late discourse touching the differences between circumcision and Baptism inasmuch as he concludeth it thus By this time I hope it appears that there is not the same reason why Baptism administred unto Infants should reach Mr. A. p. 29 the ends thereof as there was why Circumcision though applyed to Infants formerly should attain its end For the nature of the two Ordinances differ the terms of their administration differ and the respective capacities of the Church then and the Church now differ and according to that rule in Logick where the things them selves differ there the reason of those things differ also I answer briefly It hath been sufficiently proved and this lately enough that there is the same reason altogether why Baptism administred unto Infants should reach the ends thereof which there is or was why circumcision being administred unto Infants also should attain the ends of it Neither doth any difference found either in the nature of the two Ordinances or in the terms of their Administration or in the capacities of the Churches then and now diversifie the said reason or prove in the least that infant-Infant-Baptism should be lesse sufficient to atchieve and compasse all Baptismall ends then Infant-circumcision was to attain the ends of Circumcision Old reliques and new-made Idols differ in their natures they differ or may differ in their administrations or communications unto the people Papists and Protestants may be in a different capacitie to understand the evill of them and yet all these and ten times more differences like unto these notwithstanding there may be the same reason why the one should occasion or produce the evill which is proper for it to produce which there is for the other to do likewise Nor is it true that the Church during Circumcision was in that part at least or in those members of it who by the standing law were to be circumcised I mean in the children or Infants belonging to it in a different capacitie from the church now under Baptism in the Infants hereof The Infants of the church or of Believers now are as capable of the ends of Baptism as the Infants of the Jewish church were of the ends of circumcision Therefore Mr. A. all the while he hath been labouring to overthrow the parallel between Infant-Baptism and Infant-circumcision hath dwelt at the sign of the Labour-in vain And this is the unhappy end of his second argument magnifying it self against Infant-baptism His third Argument waits the leisure of this preface Sect. 135. My next argument shall be taken from the different nature of the two ministrations of the Old and New Testament M. A. p. 30. as rendring Infant-Baptism in that precise consideration of it as APPLIED TO INFANTS disagreeable to the ministration of the Gospell but withall more correspondent with the ministration of the Law Therefore thus I further argue I suppose we had the strength of what he is able to argue from the different ministrations of the Law and of the Gospell against Infant-baptism in the prosecution of his former argument Nor do I apprehend what purchase he hath made with this Preface unlesse it be of a blot of disparagement in supposing that Infant-baptism Infant-Baptism is very unproperly said to be applied unto Infants may be considered as applied to Infants and in this consideration to be disagreeable to the ministration of the Gospel If Infant-baptism be in no other respect dâ—sagreeable to the ministratioÌ„ of the gospel but only in the precise coÌ„sideratioÌ„ of it as applied unto Infants it will be found sufficiently corresponding with this ministration But though the usherie of the argumeÌ„t approaching be but weak yet it is possible that the argument it self may be strong A man that stumbles at the door may behave himself worthily in the house Therefore let us now see whether Mr. A. doth not gaâ—her up as much or more in his argument as Mr. A's third Argument p. 30. he scattered in the Introduction His third argument then is this If Infant-Baptism be disagreeable to the ministration of the new
Testament then Infants ought not to be baptized But Infant-Baptism is disagreeable to the ministration of the new Testament Ergo If the minor in this argument had been a meet helper or match for the major they had between them established the throne of Anti-poedobaptism for ever But Now the Syllogism is like those equivocall and imperfect animals bred of the sâ—ime and mudd of the great deluge Aâ—tera pars vivit rud's est pars altera tellus i. One part 's alive the other unform'd earth And that Proposition which is strong and which needs no proof Mr. A. proves very substantially but that which is weak he supports with strawes instead of props and pillars Dantur opes nullis nunc nisi divitibus Rich gifts to rich men only given are What refuse is falls to the poor mans share Sect. 136. However suffering Mr. A. to enjoy his major Proposition with the proofs thereof in peace let us fairly and freely consider whether there be the same reason why he should enjoy his minor with the proofs thereof upon the same terms 1. Saith he the Truth hereof meaning of his minor Proposition in the first place is conspicuous and perceptible i. is fully manifest may by a narrow inspection haply be discerned by what hath been made good in our former argument For there we proved Baptism as administred to Infants lesse edifying as to the severall ends of it then when administred unto Beleevers and if lesse edifying then the more suitable and comformable to the ministration of the Law which was a ministation of lesse light and edification and to the same proportion disproportionate to the ministration of the Gospell c. I answer 1. If Mr. A. hath nothing else to make good his minor Proposition in this argument then what he made good in his former the Proposition must stand upon its own bottom and shift for it self For it hath been made good that in that argument he made nothing good at all at least nothing relating to his Proposition here 2. Whereas he bears upon this Principle that what is lesse edifying is more sutable and conformable to the ministration of the Law because this was a ministration of lesse light and edification doth he not leane upon a broken reed that will pierce his hand For suppose we that which is little questionable or however possible that the ministery or preaching of Andrew Bartholomew or or any other of the Apostles was lesse edifying then the Ministerie or preaching of Paul doth this prove that their Ministerie was in any degree sutable or conformable to the ministration of the Law or however unsuitable unto or unlawfull under the Gospell But this reason we formerly weighed in the ballance and found it light See Sect. 53. 118. and elsewhere 3. And lastly it hath been sufficiently also proved against Mr. A's notion that Baptism as administred i. as it may and ought to be administred unto Infants is not lesse edifying but rather more then when administred unto men For this see Sect. 56. Thus we see that Mr. A's first demonstration of his minor Proposition being truly cast up amounteth to just nothing Hear we therefore his second Sect. 137. Mr. A. p. 30 31. 2. I might in the second place well suppose Infant-Baptism to savour strongly of the Legal Ministration because the principal arguments produced in defence thereof are such as do arise out of and are deducted from the example of Infant-Circumcision a principall part of the legall ministration and from the analogie or proportion which is supposed to be between them and not only so but likewise because such arguments and pleas tend to draw down this part of the Gospell ministration as applicable to Infants unto the line and levell of the Legall For answer 1. This proof is guiltie of the capitall crime of untruth affirming that the principall Arguments produced in the defence of Iâ—fant-Baptism are deducted from the example of Infant-circumcision a A little after to the same purpose he saith that these arguments for Infant-baptism are as the axletree upon which the controversie on the Poedo-baptists side turneth as the weâ—p running all along that piece of that discourse I beleeve Mr. A. himself knoweth the contrary as viz. 1. that we do not at all plead Infant-baptism from the example of Infant-circumcision we knowledge and professe that Infant-circumcision under the Law would be no ground or warrant of Infant-Baptism under the Gospell did not the Gospell it self commend the Ordinance of Baptism unto us and 2. that our principall arguments as he calleth them for Infant-Baptism are founded upon New-testament passages and Evangelicall considerations as our writings and arguings do sufficiently testifie 3. That we do not however draw arguments as he twice chargeth us in the plurall number as if not only our principall arguments but the greatest part of the whole number of them were drawn from the example of Infant-Circumcision He cannot prove so much as with colour that we draw any pluralitie of Arguments for Infant-Baptism from that example 4. That we do not in our disputes about Baptism so much mention or insist upon the example as the precept or institution it self of Infant-Circumcision Therefore the very head ground-work and substance of this second proof of his said Proposition is a notorious untruth and consequently all that he buildeth upon it p. 31 32 33. I mean upon this supposition that our principall arguments for Infant Baptism are deducted from the example of Infant-Circumcision must needs be eccentricall to his cause But 2. Suppose we should build our Tenent of Infant-Baptism under the Gospell upon the example of Infant-Circumcision under the Law which notwithstanding we are free and farre from as hath been shewed were we not as justifiable as Mr. A. himself in building his Tenent and practise answerable concerning the unlawfulnesse of Church-communion with persons by him called unbaptized upon that Legall precept by which uncircumcised persons were excluded from communion with the Jewish Church in their holy things See pag. 109. of this his discourse and pag. 11. of his answer to the 40. Queries But the rudiments of the world it seems are substantiall and firm ground for Mr. A. to build upon but Boggs and Quicksands to his Baptismall Adversaries Sect. 138. 3. Suppose there had been no such Ordinance as Circumcision under the Law no precept that Infants should have been circumcised yet upon a supposall of this Ordinance given or to be given there would have been the same reason one or more which now there was why it should be administred consequently why God should injoyn it to be administred to Infants Now that we interesse the mention either of the example or of the precept of Infant Circumcision in our disputes about Baptism we do it not so much if at all for the letter of either as for the spirit of them i. for those reasons sake upon which we â—udge them to have
CATA-BAPTISM OR New Baptism waxing old and ready to vanish away In Two Parts The former Containes LVIII CONSIDERATIONS With their respective Proofs and Consectaries Pregnant for the healing of the common scruples touching the subject of Baptism and manner of Baptizing The latter contains an Answer to a Discours against Infant-Baptism published not long since by W. A. under the Title of Some Baptismall Abuses Briefly Discovered c. In both sundry things not formerly insisted on are Discovered and Discussed By J. G. a Minister of the Gospel of Jesus Christ And were all Baptized into Moses c. 1 Cor. 10. 2. I indeed Baptize you with water Unto Repentance Mat. 3 11. Baptismus est lavacrum regenerationis sed non ita ut regenerati tantùm illo debeant obsignari sed etiam Regenerandi Musc in Mat. 22. 41. 42. Baptizantur Infantes in futuram poenitentiam fidem Calv. Instit lib. 4. c. 16. §. 20. London Printed for H Cripps and L. Lloyd and are to be sold at their shops neer the Castle in Cornhil and in Popes-head-Alley 1655. To the Sons and Daughters of God walking in the Way best known by the Name of Ana-Baptism growth in Grace and the knowledg of Jesus Christ our Lord. BELOVED I speak it as in the §. 1. sight of God I am in a great straite how to temper my speech for your best advantage in this my solemn address unto you Very loth I am on the one hand to deal so unfaithfully or un-Christianly with you as upon such an opportunity not to speak the truth unto you in such things wherein I either certainly know or else have weighty grounds to judge that it most neerly concerns you to know and to consider it and on the other hand very unwilling I am also to speak any thing for which either weakness or uncharitableness it self shall be able to judg me your enemie I well know it becomes me not to say of you as Nabal'â— servant spake of his Master He is so wicked that a man cannot speak to him a 1 Sam. 25. 17. meaning without offending or provoking him yet my Experience importunes me to speak this that some of you yea some of those whom I have cause to judge the strongest amongst you are so weak that words as innocent as inoffensive as the greatest Christian tenderness or caution can lightly indite have notwithstanding been a burthen and offence unto them I could readily instance in sundry particulars as well of words phrases and passages of this harmless import as of persons among you who nevertheless have turned their innocencie into guilt and made themselves agrieved at them but that I fear lest this also should be an offence unto you I call God for a record upon my soul that I have §. 2. not the least touch of any malignancie or frowardness of spirit against any of you but can freely serve the meanest of you in love yea and stoop to loose the latcher of his shoe who is the most jealous amongst you of the candor and simplicitie of my heart towards you Yea I have upon occasion and this more than once given a very passeable account of my unpartiall respects unto all of your way and practise worthy the repute of godliness by girding my self and ministring with all my might to some particulars of you But I know how hard a thing it is not to be offended with him that shall touch the Apple of a mans eye or that shall attempt to change the glorie and height of his confidence into the shame of guilt and errour And the truth is that you have much obstructed the way of your return and regainment unto the Truth by an importune and undue magnifying of your errour If you could have been content in estimating your new Baptism and the want or non-practise of it in others to contain you selves within those bounds of Reason and Truth which the Holy Ghost prescrib's in a like or rather indeed in a far better case saying That Circumcision is nothing and uncircumcision is nothing but the keeping the Commandments of God a 1 Cor. 7. 19. and again In Jesus Christ neither circumcision availeth any thing nor uncircumcision but Faith which worketh by Love b Gal. 5. 6. and yet again If the circumcision keep the righteousness of the Law his un-circumcision shal be counted for circumcision c Rom. 2. 26. See these passages argued and opened Water-Dipping p. 78. 79. 80. c. If I say you could look upon your Baptism as availing you nothing without Faith working by Love and keeping the Commandments of God and again upon the want of your Baptism as no wayes prejudiciall unto those who under another Baptism beleeve unfeignedly in Jesus Christ and walk holily and humbly with their God this would be an effectual door of hope opened unto me that you were yet within call and might be reduced and brought back again in your judgments unto the truth as some of the best of those who through humain frailty and immaturity of consideration had embraced your way from time to time have done What a man moderately or soberly valueth may §. 3. be purchased of him at a reasonable rate But whilst God's Nothing yea that which is less then that Nothing of his we now speak of is your All things whilst you judge your tything of mint anise and cummin or rather indeed of nettles thistles and unprofitable weeds to be the practise of mercy and judgement and the weighty things of the Law your reconcilement with the Truth though advancing in the front of my desires yet keeps in the reer of my expectations For when a man prizeth any thing he possesseth at an unreasonable rate he is so much the more like to keep possession of it still unless haply the thief digs through the house and violently takes it away Some of your Churches esteem all others no better then Heathen and Publicans who refuse to cast in their lot with them in their venturous practise of new Baptism a Ad forum fâ—cto concurcu clamorem tollunt omnes non baptizatos jubent interfici tanquam paganos impios Joh. Sleidan de Anabaptistis Comment lib. 10. refusing all Christian communion with them though otherwise they be the glory of Christ and of the Gospel when as many of themselves are the shame and reproach of both And if my intelligence faileth me not other of your Churches are lifting up their hearts to a like zealous exaltation of your way as by proscribing or evacuating all the Faith Love Zeal Holiness Meekness Humility Wisdom and Knowledge shining in the Christian world which shall not approve themselves unto you by falling down before the golden image which you have set up But in this your humour of making such sacred § 4. treasure of your new Baptism you declare your selves to be the true heirs and successors of those in all ages who
names through pride that they think him a railer that doth but name their faults and they look to be stroaked and smoothed and reverented whilest they speak most wickedly so did the Popish Bishops when they were condemning the Martyrs a Plain Scripture proofs for Infants Church-membership c. Page 201. This strain of spirit in the men we speak of fully sympathizeth with the observation of a learned man which giveth us to understand that the way of Ana-baptism seldome or never prospers or thrives but only when it is indulged countenanced and made much of especially by the Powers of this world whereas the Truth on the other hand hath flourished most under opposition and persecution from the world But so critically and capriciously tender are these men over their way that they judge it criminal in those that shall call it Anabaptism or by any other name then Anti-pedo-baptism by which it seems Mr Tombs hath baptized it as it were to amuze the common sort of people and to put it out of their reach so much as to name it amongst them But though Anti-pedo-baptism be a name of a sufficient length yet is it too short in signification for that practise or way on which Mr Tombs like a Parens â—ustricus hath imposed it For whereas there are two grand errors or evils in this way the one an opposing the baptizing of children the other a second baptizing of those baptized already the Name Anti-pedo-baptism expresseth it only by the former and so is but a kind of half-name to it Whereas the word Anabaptism although it formally signifieth only the latter yet it doth withal connotare or implicitly import the former also For he that perswadeth to re-baptize at age consequently perswadeth that Baptism in Infancy is or was a nullity and so a practise not warrantable Therefore ana-Ana-baptism of the two is not only a word of a more easie and ready pronunciation a word by reason of the long accustomed use of it in the Baptismal controversies more passable with men but more commensureably significant also of that practise or way which is sufficiently known amongst us by this name and super-sufficiently otherwise Besides though it should be supposed that the word Anabaptism is not a name or tearm so properly at first imposed on their way yet the use and end of names and words being to convey things from one mans minde and understanding to anothers the word we speak of best performing this service in reference to the matter or thing signified by it ought not to be stumbled at or excepted against unless men desire that it should not be understood when their way is spoken either for or against Loquendum ut vulgus sentiendum ut sapientes was an old rule and I know no sufficient reason why it should be antiquated or cashiered and some wise men have said that in civil affairs malum benè positum non debet moveri When Mr Fisher with his fellow-subscribers in their late representation stile themselves the baptized Churches of the Nation no man can tell by the signification or import of the word Baptized what Churches they mean onely by the importune assuming and arrogant appropriating of the word to themselves the meaning of the men may be conjectured For in calling themselves and their Churches The baptized Churches in this Nation they represent and call in effect all the rest of the Churches of Christ in the Nation by the odious and reproachful Epithites of Pagan and Heathen Yea the truth is that the expression as it is arrogant in the highest and swelling with vanity so it is very exasperating and provoking to all sorts of people in the Nation and enough to alarm both Magistrate and people to stand upon their guard and to await the consequence of so bloody and threatening a charge But the very self same spirit which wrought so effectually in the Donatists of old worketh at no whit a lower rate in these men For they importunely affirmed that the Churches of Christ and true Baptism was amongst them onely and not to be found in all the world besides a Donatistae volebant latitudineÌ„ regni Christi coarctare in Angulum Affricae ita ut extra sectam suam quae obtinuerat in Africa negarent esse uspiam Christianos Musc in Mat. 8. 11. Donatistae à multis Patribus ab Augustino praesertim coarguuntur quod EcclesiaÌ„ CatholicaÌ„ in anguluÌ„ Africae ad se contraxâ—â—sent affirmanâ—es alibi EcclesiaÌ„ non râ—periri Pet. Mart. Lâ—c. Clas 4. c. 6. § 6. Donatus capitis sui somnium sequutus solùm Christi Ecclesiam in Africa esse dicebat neque usqùam alibi nisi istâ—iâ— veram esse baptismum cujus vesanie multi adhaerentes magnam calâ—mit 〈…〉 Africanis Ecclesiis attulerunt quum impii crud les homines non minus ferro quà m impiis vâ—cibus circunqâ—aque in obsistentes desaevirent Pratâ—olus de Haeresibus pag. 149. Item dicere soletis quod nos Christi baptismum non habeamus quòd praeter vestram communionem nusquam sit August Epist 172. Ad Crispinum Donatistam But whereas both in the front and in the rere of this their representation they give the preheminence to their Messengers a kind of Officer of their own for such they seem to make them and which Christ when he Ascended up on high never gave Eph. 4. 11. 12. above their Elders the Elder being an Officer given and appointed by Christ do they not prefer the Officers of their own Election above the Officers of Christ We read onely of two for expositors generally make their number no more who are stiled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Apostles Legates or Messengers of the Churches when as now a considerable part of the world was planted with Christian Churches where as Mr Fisher and his salute us mith a greater number of their Messengers then Elders and name unto us no fewer then thirteen belonging to I know not how few of their Churches Besides it cannot be proved that these Messengers though the Apostle as Musculus upon the place well hinteth for modesty sake dâ—th not insist upon his Apostolique Authority or term them his Messengers but cast's honour upon the Churches calling them their Messengers yet it cannot I say be proved that the Churches did by any power or Authority vested in them erect such a kind of ordinary or standing Officer amongst them as a Messenger is especially that should be more honourable then their Elders and Teachers Officers expresly given and appointed by Christ or that they ever met together about the business of such a choyce It is much more probable that the Apostle himself according to the emergent exigencies of the affairs of the Churches with which upon occasion he conversed did commend unto them the two persons termed by him the Messengers of the Churches which are sâ—pposed to have been Barnabas and Luke to serve them in the nature of Messengers or Internuncii
my God is this the language of a Son of thine But alass all this is but a small first fruits of that large Harvest of those rank venemous viperous ulcerous fluxes of folly flesh and fierceness expressions of his own Genius which out of the abundance of his heart he hath poured forth upon the head of a person of signal worth and honour and who is a shining and burning light in his generation yea and hath done I verily beleeve more real service unto Jesus Christ and the precious souls of men then all the Anabaptists as such and whilest such in the Land that I say not in the world But with such stuff as this he evinceth Mr Baxters reports to be full of falshood and his arguments to be sophistical and silly And as for the notions grounds and principles upon which he asserteth his Ana-baptismal cause against him are they not very importune and burthensome to any intelligent and considering man Or are not these some of them and their fellows like unto them 1. That the true way of Baptism which we must suppose to be that way of Baptism wherein Mr Fisher § 6. Mr Fishers Principles and his party are ingaged is the strait and narrow way which leadeth unto life and which few find b Pag. 414. Doth not this evidently imply that Mr F s sence is that when our Saviour admonished his Disciples and others to enter in at the strait gate yea to strive to enter in at it because wide is the Gate and broad is the way which leadeth to destruction c. his meaning was that men should strive to be water-baptized and this by dipping and that by the wide Gate and broad way he meant either baptizing by washing without dipping or want of baptizing at all It is a wonder of the first Magnitude unto me how such a conceit as this should â—ver clime up into his faâ—cy that by the strait and narrow way which leadeth unto life and which few find should be meant his way of baptizing Considering 1. That no man needs strive at all to be thus baptized all comers are entertained by the men of this way and all are freely admitted to walk in it who desire it 2. That this way can in no respect lightly imaginable by a sâ—ber man be termed strait or narrow Not 1. In respect of any great trouble or offensiveness to the flesh in the entrance into it at least not in reference to many constitutions especially in the hotter seasons of the yeer when both men and boys are wont to disport themselves by ducking and diving under water least of all in the hotter climates of the Earth where going into cool waters is matter of solace and pleasure as some of Mr Fishers own party do inform us And doubtless the narrow and strait way of which our Saviour speaks is one and the same in and unto all Nations and their respective Inhabitants Nor 2. Can this way be termed strait or narrow in respect of any disparagement or civil danger or disadvantage that is like to attend it at least when and where it is more generally practised as it was in our Saviour and John Baptists days when Jerusalem and all Judea and all the Region round about Jordan came unto John and were baptized of him Which notwithstanding it seems that Christ made and baptized more Disciples then John yea John's Disciples themselves complained unto him that all men came unto Christ meaning to be Baptized Least of all can it be attended with any matter of dishonour or dis-esteem when or where it is countenanced by the Civil Magistrate and places of honour trust and profit indifferently if not more frequently conferred upon men of this way as well as upon others which lately was and still is in part the condition of it in this State and Nation Considering 3. that it cannot be said of Mr Fisher's way of Baptism that few there are that find it at least if it be supposed to be the same way with that wherein John and Christ baptized For we lately heard that about the time when Christ spake the words Jerusalem and all Judea and all the Region about Jordan with vast multitudes besides had found the way of their Baptizing 4. That neither doth this way lead unto life otherwise then in conjunction with and by the mediation of Faith and Holiness without which no man shall see the Lord and in conjunction with and by the initiation of these Infant-Baptism and Baptism without Dipping will lead to life as well if not better then Mr Fisher's way of Baptizing Therefore however his way is not the strait and narrow way which leadeth unto life and which so few find Besides by his asserting such a principle as this he adjudgeth the whole Christian world ever since the days of Christ and his Apostles a very inconsiderable number only excepted unto the vengeance of eternal fire For how few of all that lovely and blessed generation I mean of Saints and holy men Martyrs and others have found entred or walked in Mr Fisher's way of Baptizing But it is no new thing for men who have a fancy of their own to lift up to Heaven to throw down whatsoever standeth in their way unto hell But the saying of Mr Baxter to Mr Tombs is very considerable at this turn It is saith he no small degree of evil that a man is fallen to when he dare slander or make infamous the whole or greatest part of all the holy Churches on Earth to maintain the reputation of his opinion a Plain Scripture Proof of Infants Church mâ—mbership c. p. 199. 2. Another Principle or Notion upon the credit § 7. whereof with importune confidence he builds his Anabaptismal Fabrique against Mr B. and whosoever is this That the children of the unbeleeving Jews are not broken off and excluded with their parents from Church and Covenant upon the account of their parents unbeleif only but for want of faith in their own persons c. b baby-Baby-Baptism p. 110. How little truth yea or reason or sence there is in this Assertion especially if he intends it as he pretends to do in opposition to his Adversaries argument drawn from the Consideration of the breaking off of the Jews Children from the Covenant is evident from hence viz. that the children i. e. the Infants or young children for of these only his Adversaries speak of the Iews who were dis-covenanted by God had no more want of faith in their own persons then either Isaac or Iacob themselves whilest they were Infants like unto them and all the the children generally of this Nation whilst it remained upon the best and firmest terms in Covenant Therefore if their children were not cut off from Church or Covenant by God for want of Faith in their own persons neither is it Christianly reasonable to think or say that children of the latter Iews whose parents were dis-covenanted for
about Bapâ—ism it self sect 3 5 3. The present contest relating unto Baptism better laid aside by the party 's contesting then weak consciences disturb'd with it 5 4. Mr. A. doth nâ—t state his question clearly so much as to his own sence 6 5. Mr. A. and his Scripture-proofs divided about the way to satisfaction 7. 9 6. God hath authorized the Lâ—w of Nature to over-rule administrations of Institutions 8 7. Persons not truly repentant may be duly baptized 10 8. Primitive practises may be lawfully varyed from upon exigencie of circumstances 11 9. 〈…〉 eer matter of fact no good foundation to prove eithâ—r the lawfulness or unlawfulness of a practise about an instituted Ordinance in all cases 13 10. Conclusio sequitur deteriorem partem 14. 48 11. No particular Administration of an Ordinance can answâ—r the whole mind or counsel of God in or about the said ordinance 14 12. Wâ—y the Apostles might omit though not neglect the baptizing of children notwithstanding they might lawfully have done it 15 13. How the reasons upon which the Apostles might forbear infant-Infant-baptism may and may not be binding to the like forbearance now 16 14. Two reasons why the Pastors of Churches now may be in a better capacity of baptizing Infants then the Apostles or their Assistants were 18 19 20 15. How Christ and the Apostles to be imitated in what they did and did not sect 21 16. The total silence of the Scriptures about baptizing Infants what kind of proof and how it may be construed 22 23 17. How the baptizing of Housholds in the Scripture proveth Infant-baptism 24 18. How Christ's laying on hands on Children c. proveth Infant-baptism 25 40 132 157 158 19. Augustin a frequent and constant assertor of Infant-baptism from the Apostles 26 20. The testimony of Antient Writers for the practise of Infant-baptism by the Apostles upon what grounds authentique 27 21. No History recordeth the original of Infant-baptism 28 22. Auxentius an Arrian the first opposer of Infant baptism and Ludovicus Hetzer another Arrian and somwhat worse the first reviver of the opposition in Germany 29 23. Mr. A's Baptism a nullitie according to his own principles 29 24. No contests heard of from the Jews against the Apostles for excluding their Children from Baptism an argument that they were baptized 30 31 25. No reason imaginable why the Precept or Ordinance of Christ about the subject of Baptism should be changed by the Primitive Fathers 32 26. Practise of Ana-baptism standeth â—onely upon foundations that are either loose or irrelative 33 27. A submission unto Baptism no argument of the great successe of the Gospel 35 36 38 39 28. The Holy Ghost at libâ—rty in drawing up his own records 36 29. Vnder the expression of Men and Women in the Scriptures children also are sometimes comprehended 37 30. Baptizing of Men and Women no proof of the success of the Gospel 38 39 31. Suffer little children to come unto me how proveth that Infants were baptized in the Apostles daies 40 41 158 32. A non-scriptum proveth not a non-factum 42 33. Neither the qualifications nor the persons described of all that were baptised 42 34. No firm arguing from order of expressing 43 35. To teach and to make Disciples how widely differ 44 36. When a mans grounds for his opinions are insufficient and so evicted answering of some objections though never so substanâ—ially will not relieve them 45 168 37. Mr. A's second argument as much against the counsel of God in circumcision as against the opinion of his Adversaries in the point of Baptism 46 49 38. The greater serviceableness of a thing in one case proveth not the unlawfulness of it in all others 47 48 53 118 39. The manifestation of Christ to the world no end of Baptism 50. 51. nor yet to the baptised themselves 53 40. When Baptizing is customary and in fashion it is no sign or proof of any mans Faith or Repentance 54 41. Infant-baptizing as much or rather more instructing edifying quickning c. unto spectators as men-baptizing 56 73 159 160 42. How the Priests and Elders rejected the counsel of God against themselves not hauing been baptized of John 57 58 43. Persons duly baptized do not alwaies take up the Ordinance out of a principle of Repeâ—tance 60 44. Remission of sins to be looked for upon Repentance without or before Baptism 61 131 175 45. Circumcision not a sign and seal of the righteousnesse of Faith unto Abraham only 61 46. The Verb substantive oft used in a declarative sence 62 47. What it was that properly constituted Abraham the father of all that beleeve 62 48. Rom. 4. 11. thoroughly understood gives a great light into the Question about Baptism 64 49. Children in a capacity of engaging to the practise of Repentance as wel as men 64 65 68 69 182 50. One end of Baptism better answered or provided for by mens-baptism doth neither prove the baptizing of children unlawful nor yet that another end thereof may not be better provided for hereby 67 98 51. The end of planting not made frustrate by the non-fructifiâ—ation of the tree immediately upon the planting of it 69 152 52. Baptism how needfull for children Sect. 71. 53. No profession or declaration made unto the world by Mr. A's Baptizing 72. 75. 73. 54. Profession made by Parents at their childrens baptizing aâ— available unto others as by other men at their Baptism 73. 55. A person duly baptized is not an Agent but a patient in his Baptism 76. 56. Whâ—ther a man be to sign and seal the Articles of his Covenant with God at the time of his entring hereunto before witnesses c. 75. 76. 98. 57. Baptism not to be taken up in order to râ—mission of sins 77. 61 58. Mr. A most unchristianly taxeth the whole Christian world 79. 59. Arguments proving that a Declaration of a mans Repentance by Baptism is not required on his part to interess him in remission of sins 80. 81. 82 c. 60. Faith and repâ—â—tance according to Mr. A but dead works until Baptism quickeneth them 81. 89 61. Submission to a carnal commandment is not of more accepration with God then unto a spiritual 80. 62. Mr. A. adjudgeth the whole generation of Christians a very fâ—w only excepted both ancient and modern as well Fathers Martyrs and Reformers as others unto eternal condemnation 81. 63. Baptism can be no Declaration of any mans Repentance 82. 52 64. The Apostle Paul no where interesseth Baptism in justification or in the obtaining of remission of sins 83. 65. The remission of his sins who truly repenteth or beleevâ—th is not suspended upâ—n what another man may possibly refuse to do unto him § 83. 18. much less upon what would be sinful in himself to yeeld unto 84. 88. 66. Abrahams spiritual children are justified after the same manner â—ith him 85. 67. Baptism may relate unto salvation as some other of the Commandments of God may do and yet
thing is sufficient to satisfie some in some cases 16â— 135. A cause is not made good by aâ—swering an objection 168. 136. Sonship unto God how accrueth unto Children 169. 137. Mr. Tombs â—nd Mr. Fisher yea the Rebaptized Churches themselves at ods in points neerly relating to the question of Rebaptizing 170. 138. How all children are capable of Baptism and how nâ—t 171. 139. Baptism why described or termed the Baptism of Repentance for the remission of sins 176. 140. Baptism whether administrable unto Repentants only 177. 141. Baptism the more for the good of man because Infants capable of it 178. 142. Baptism how beneficial without faith 179. 143. What it must be that qualifieth for it 180. 144. What love of God and in what respect immediately qualifieth for Baptism 181. 145. The faith which was in Christ was not of the same kind with the faith of other beleevers 183 184. 146. The sameness of expressions doth not prove the sameness of thinâ—s 184. 147. Whether Christ was baptized upon the account of his beleeving him self to be the Sâ—n of God 185. 186. 148. That faith qualifieth for Baptism as it is dâ—clarative of spiritual Sonship § 188 189. and this by the will or appointment of God 190. 149. Christ did not make a dedication of himself to the seâ—vice of the Gospel by the solemnity of Baptism 191. 150. The reason of Christs choice of the season wherein he was baptized in reference hereunto 193. 151. Persons may be baptized in conformity to a Law of righteousness and yet not to that Law by which Christ was baptizâ—d 192. 152. Christ was not baptized in conformity to the common Law of Baptism 194. CONSIDERATION I. Câ—lourable Arguments and Grounds levied and insisted The first head of Consideraâ—ionâ— being of â— more geneâ—al import â—elatâ—ng unto â—her case Controversieâ— as wel as those about Ordinances or Baptism upon for thâ— defence of Error are more likely to take with ordinary capacities and apprâ—hensions yea and with those that are somewhat pregnant and ripe espâ—cially at first and fâ—r a season then those which are sound and substantial and dâ—monstrative of truth Proof Error befriendeth mens corruptions comporteth with their lusts justifieth them in their carnal and sensual ends and consequently in such ways and practises also which are proper and likely to advance and procure them Upon this account it cometh to pass that men and women more generally having several corruptions to gratifie worldly and carnal ends to pursue c. have a secret and inward proneness and propension unto Error as that which under the name of Truth pretends to bless them in their way Now when a person man or woman secretly wisheth that such a Doctrine or Opinion were a Truth or may be sound to be a Truth a very slender and weak argument in favor of it easily fills and satisfies them and disposeth them to cry out with the High Priest What have we any more need of wiâ—nesses Mat. 26. 65. especially when their judgments and understandings are but ordinary and weak Yea men and women for the maintaining of themselves in peace in ways and practises that are corrupt and sinful are of a listening and harâ—ening disposition as well after Teachers as grounds and arguments which will strengthen comfort and support them therein and when they meet with either they rejoyce over them as if they had found great spoils Whereas the Truth is a most severe enemy to all worldly lusts to all sinister and corrupt ends of men and consequently to all such methods ways and practises which are calculated for the compassing and obtaining of them giving men no countenance rest or peace in such ways From whence it comes to pass neither can it in reason be otherwise that persons generally are possest with a marvellous aversness and frowardness of spirit against the Truth extreamly unwilling that such an opinion should be owned or acknowledged for a Truth especially by them the face whereof is set and which peremptorily threateneth to separate between them and their beloved lusts or otherwise to shame trouble and torment them in the fulfilling of them By means of this great aversness in men to be convinced of the Truth it cometh to pass as frequent expeperience teacheth that Arguments and Grounds of greatest evidence and power for the eviction manifestation and demonstration of the Truth are but as the shadows of the mountains unto them clouds without water and words without weight And so the Truth it self though mightily evinced is by them respected under the reproachful notion and name of Error Both these particulars as well the incredible aversness in men to admit of Truth though coming to them in the clearest light of Evidence and Demonstration as that strange propenseness towards the entertainment of Error lately mentioned are plainly asserted by the Apostle 2 Tim. 4. 3. For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine but after their own lusts will heap to themselves Teachers having itching ears The metaphor of itching ears implies 1. The unclean distempers in the hearts and spirits of men as the itch properly so called is to the flesh or bodies of men 2. It implies also the great and impatient desire and propenseness which is in such persons to be spiritually scratched i. e. to have these distempers of theirs only so touched and handled by Teachers that it may be matter of pleasure and gratification unto them as indeed it is when such things are delivered in the Name of God and as from the Scriptures whereby they are really comforted and seemingly and to their own sence justified in their evil ways Consectary If colourable and light arguments levied and managed for the defence of Error be more apt to take and satisfie ordinary capacities and persons unskilful in the Word of Truth then arguments of greatest pregnancy and weight raised and held forth for the vindication of the Truth then need it not seem strange unto any man that such multitudes should be ensnared and carried away in their judgments as dayly are unto the opinion which fighteth against the Baptizing of Children with such arguments which have little weight worth or substance in them CONSIDERATION II. GOd requireth and expecteth from men as well to beleeve as to practise not only upon Grounds plain and near at hand such I mean which as it were at the first sight and by plainness and palpableness of inference enforce either the truth to be beleeved or the thing to be practised but even upon grounds somewhat more remote yea and secret insinuations and from which neither can the truth that is to be beleeved nor the action or thing that is to be practised be evinced or inferred but by a diligent exercise and close engagement of the reason judgment and understanding of a man Proâ—f When God spake thus unto Moses out of the midst of the burning bush I am the God of Abraham the God of
modern Writers also who notwithstanding are constant Assertors of infant-Infant-Baptism The reason of this non-sequitur is because as well a baptizing in rivers as with a total submersion are particularities extraneous to the main end of Baptismal Institution of which afterwards although they might have and questionless had their weight and worth of Consideration for a season and whilest they were continued at least if we suppose them or either of them in respect of what was determinate and particular in them to have been practised for any season by vertue of an Institution or Command For Baptism may be commanded and yet not commanded to be practised in rivers no more then not prohibited or with a total submersion of the body CONSIDERATION XVII EVery defect or mistake by men in the Administration of a Divine Ordinance or Institution doth not so pollute this Ordinance to him that receives or partakes of the Administration as to render the Counsel or gracious Intendments of God in the said Ordinance voyd or of no effect no not in relation â—nto such a man Proof That Table of Divine Ordinances which God hath spread for the benefit and blessing of the World for the filling of the children of men with righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Ghost would either prove a Snare or at the best but as such a dream unto them which an hungry man dreameth as the Prophet Isaiah speaketh and behold he eateth but he awaketh and his soul is empty * Isai 29. 8. if every defect or mistake in these respective Administrations should either pollute those that are partakers of them or render them as a meer nullity unto them For are not the Ordinances and Institutions we speak of appurtenances of the Gospel and so of the same consideration with the Gospel it self and the Ministry thereof Yea is not the Preaching or Ministry of the Gospel one of these Ordinances yea the first-born and principal of them And yet the great Apostle expresseth himself in this whether bemoaning or admiring interrogation and who is sufficient for these things †2 Cor. 2. 16. speaking of the managing of the affairs of the Gospel by men And elâ—ewhere he affirmeth that we know but in part and prophecy in part * 1 Cor. 13. 9 If then every defect error or miscarriage in the preaching or hearing the Gospel and there is the same reason of other Ordinances should render the Ordinance of Preaching sinful or unprofitable unto men in vain had this great and blessed Ordinance been vouchsafed by God unto the World Nor can they who live under Ordinances and partake of their Administrations from time to time have any sufficient or substantial ground of reaping comfort or edification by them if every defect in these Administrations were of such a malignity as to destroy their usefulness For what assurance can any man have that he that performs the Administration performeth the service with all requirements necessary and appointed by God thereunto They who preached the Gospel out of envy and strife in Pauls days supposing thereby to add affliction to his bonds meaning that they conceited that he would be much troubled and grieved that they should gain credit and draw away his Interest amongst Christians to themselves by preaching whilest he was layd aside by imprisonment c. did service to the world notwithstanding by their preaching although they preached upon such unworthy terms as these otherwise he would not have rejoyced in such their preaching which yet he professeth to have done * Phil. 1. 18. The prayer of Hezekiah for those that are the Passover in his days otherwise then it was written i. e. then God had appointed was The good Lord pardon every one that prepareth his heart to seek God the Lord God of his fathers though he be not cleansed according to the purisication of the Sanctuary and upon this prayer it immediately followeth And the Lord harkened unto Hezekiah and healed the people * Chron. 30. 18. 19. 20. How much more will he pardon such irregularities in holy Administrations which have been committed through ignorance or want of light in the Administration so as not to make the persons partaking of these Administrations sufferers or losers by them upon their faithful applications of themselves in prayer unto him on that behalf Consectary If every defect or mistake in the Administration of a Divine Institution depriveth not him that partakes of such an Administration of the benefit or blessing thereof rendreth not the Administration null or voyd then may that Baptism which hath been administred unto and received by men in their Infancy be available unto them for all gracious intents ends and purposes appropriated unto Baptism though it should be made never so plainly to appear that some irregularity cleaved unto and attended the said Administration CONSIDERATION XVIII WHatsoever right or title unto an Ordinance or Priviledg aâ—crueth unto any person upon a special consideration or ground the same right and title appertaineth unto all those in whom the same consideration or ground taketh place or is to be found Proof The Apostle Peter justifieth this principle Acts 10. 47. and by the Authority of it pleadeth the Lawfulness of baptizing those on whom the Holy Ghost fell whilest he was preaching unto them at Cornelius his house Then answered Peter Can any man forbid water that these should not be baptized which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we So if any person among the Jews had right to Circumcision meerly as he was or because he was lineally descended in a way of natural propagation from Abraham it unquestionably follows that whosoever in all the world was thus descended had the same right to Circumcision also It is upon the account and credit of this Maxim or Conclusion that beleeving women are and ought to be admitted with men-beleevers unto the Lords Table for whose admission hereunto there is neither precept nor example I mean express in either kind For whereas a late Defender of the Faith of new Baptists pretends by the grammatical indulgence of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1 Cor. 11. 28. to find a precept for womens admission in this kind his finding according to the Greek Proverb is no Treasure but Coals The tenor of the place according to the original is this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. translated thus But let a man examine himself and so let him eat c. The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith this Critique is of the epicoene gender and signifieth both Sexes either man or woman and therefore signifieth so here His premisses are strong and not to be withstood but his inference is weak and contemptible For though 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth in the general signifie either man or woman yet doth it not always signifie both nay very frequently it signifieth the male sex only Witness Mat. 8. 9. c. 8. 9. 32. Mat. 11. 8. 19. c. 12. 10. Joh.
be cleerly made known unto men Otherwise as the Apostle argueth in a like case If the Trumpet give an uncertain sound who shall prepare himself to the Battel In like manner if the Tenor of an Institution be imperfect and some things only appertaining to it be expressed and other things of a like relation suppressed or concealed how shall men either prepare themselves to a due observation of this Institution or know at any time whether it be duly administred observed or received or no Consectary If an Ordinance or Institution may be duly and regularly administred without any such ingredient whether of Ceremony or Morality which God himself hath not prescribed or injoyned in the Tenor of the Institution nor otherwise then may the Ordinance of Baptism be duly and regularly administred and received without a Total submersion of the body of the person baptized inasmuch as this is no where expresly prescribed or injoyned by God CONSIDERATION XXI JN what circumstance or modality soever in or about the Administration of an Ordinance not prescribed by God himself any person shall place Religion or think that in the observation thereof he performs an act of worship unto God he is in this point Superstitious and a will-worshipper Proof To evidence the truth of this Consideration the descrip-of Superstition and will-worship is sufficient 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sive superstitio as Cameron well describeth it a Camer de Eccles est cultus Dei sed qualem sibi praescribit ingenium humanum i. e. Superstition is a worshiping of God but such a worshiping of him as the wit or wisdom of men prescribeth unto it self Another defineth it to be Cultus seu modus câ—lendi Deum arbitrio humano sine Dei praecepto susceptus b Rivet in Exod. 20. a worship or manner of worshiping God according to the will and pleasure of men taken up without any precept of God If this be the nature of Superstition or will-worship to worship God or rather to conceit that a man doth worship God by any ceremony gesture or action which himself hath not prescribed it is a plain case that whosoever placeth religion in any ceremony circumstance or modality in the observation of any divine Ordinance which God hath not enjoyned is in this behalf a son of Superstition and a will-worshipper Consectarie If they who think they do God service and truly worship him by the observation of any rite circumstance or action in the administration or reception of an Ordinance which God himself hath not prescribed be upon this account will-worshipers and Superstitious it roundly follows that they who administer Baptism by dipping all-over and think that by this mode of that Administration they worship God are in the said condemnation of will-worship and superstition inasmuch as God hath no where in his Word prescribed this mode of the Administration From the same ground and principle it likewise followeth that they who having been once baptized as suppose in their Infancy shall conceit they honour or worship God aright by a second or after Baptism are children of the same error inasmuch as God hath no where prescribed a Baptism upon Baptism nor yet declared Baptism received in Infancy to be null CONSIDERATION XXII SAcramental ingagements the more early imposed are so much the more improveable and the more binding also Proof This Consideration also is hereafter asserted and the truth of it cleered § 161. 163. and elsewhere in the second part of this discourse Doubtless Circumcision under the Law was never the less but rather the more both improveable by and binding unto the Jews because received by them in Infancy Otherwise as hath been formerly argued there is little question but God would have imposed it not upon Infancy but upon maturity of years nor is it to be beleeved that He that hath made this order for men as we lately heard Let all things be done unto edifying would impose a service or action upon men upon such terms according to which it should either not not be edifying at all or less edifying Consectary If Sacramental Ingagements be both so much the more binding upon those who are under them and likewise so much the more improveable by them by how much the sooner they are imposed then must Infant-Baptisme needs be more effectual for all baptismal ends and purposes then after Baptism The Consequence is apparent CONSIDERATION XXIII ADult Baptisme standingly administred in constituted Churches and amongst Believers cannot lightly but prove a root of bitternesse and occasion perpetual quarrels contests and emulations amongst them Proof The reason hereof is because the want of a positive and certain rule whereby to adjudge issue and determine such cases and questions which are frequently incident to any Society or Body of men must needs the ordinary temper and weaknesse of men considered ingender strife contention and discontents amongst them If a Church shall passe by the time of Infancy and not baptize the children of her Members under this age by what rule will they baptize them afterwards To say they are to be baptized when they shall believe and make known their faith to the Church by their lives or works and withall desire Baptism is to speak very inconsiderately and to prescribe a rule every whit as dark and questionable as the case it selfe that is to be measured and adjudged by it For who knoweth not that the members of a Church are commonly of different judgments apprehensions as about other matters so about nothing more then about the signes and properties of a true Faith So that when a person shall come to desire Baptism who it may be hath satisfied one part of the Church touching the soundnesse and sincerity of his Faith another part hereof will remain dissatisfied In this case here will be Ephraim against Manasseh and Manasseh against Ephraim and both indeed against Judah I mean the truth The judgements even of sober and able Christians for the most part are about nothing more divided nor in reason more like to be divided then about the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or demonstrative effects of a sound Faith I confess it is an easie matter for Master Tombes or Master Fisher here to interpose their sence instead of a rule to decide such cases as that specified and to tell us Magisterially what they judge meet to be done but whether their Churches will agree about the sence and interpretation of what they shall prescribe for a rule in such cases or if they shall agree in this whether they will own and consent unto the sufficiency of this rule is very questionable Yea rather it is no question but that there will be a battail fought by yea's and nay's if not by more angry and fierce souldiers about it See this Consideration more amply propounded and fully vindicated by Master Baxter in his Discourse for Infant-Baptism p. 130 131. where likewise he substantially proveth that the ordinary practise of
baptizing the children of Christians at age must needs run all into confusion Consectary If the practise of baptizing Christian 's children at age in constituted Churches be such a method or course of baptizing The third Head of Considerations which more immediately relate unto Infant-Baptism and argue the lawfulness of it yea and more then lawfulness ordinarily which is apt to fill these Churches with perpetual contentions and strife then is it not a Method allowed much less prescribed by Christ CONSIDERATION XXIV THe ordinary practise of baptizing Infants in the Church is much more edifying both to the Church and to the persons also baptized when come to years of discretion then the baptizing of men and women only Proofs This Consideration as to point of truth is demonstratively argued and asserted more then once in the latter part of this discourse and so needs no traverse here The Reader is desired for his satisfaction in this to peruse Sect. 56. 73. 159. 160. of that part Consectary If Infant-Baptism contributes more towards the edification both of the Body of the Church and of the persons themselves also baptized then the baptizing of men and women only then is it the unquestionable Will of God that Infant-Baptism should be practised in the Churches of Christ in as much as his order appointment is very express in this Let all things be done to edification 1 Cor. 14. 26. And again Seek that ye may excel to the edification of the Church 1 Cor. 14. 12. of which Scriptures in the second part of this Discourse Sect. 159. 48. CONSIDERATION XXV CHildren were admitted unto Baptism in the days of Christ and of the Apostles Proof For proof of this the Reader is only desired diligently to peruse the 22 23. and so the following Sections of the latter part of this discourse to the end of the 32 Section as also the 40. 132. 157. 158. Sections with several other passages hereof Consectary If Children were admitted unto Baptism in the dayes of Christ and his Apostles then can there no sufficient reason be given why water should be denied unto them in these dayes that they should not be baptized CONSIDERATION XXVI AS Circumcision was a Seal of the righteousness of Faith under the Law so is Baptism a Seal of the same righteousness under the Gospel Proof That Circumcision was a Seal of the righteousness mentioned under the Law and this simply and indefinitely and not with any appropriation unto Abraham or the righteousnesse of his faith onely is demonstratively proved in the latter part of this Treatise Sect. 61 62 63. c. That Baptism is a Seal of the same righteousnesse under the Gospel cannot reasonably be denied and is granted by the more considering persons of the adverse party The Author of the Treatise entituled Of Baptism having said pag. 4. That the righteousness which Abraham had by Faith the acceptation he had was sealed up to him by the signe of Circumcision c. immediately subjoyneth Now what Abraham had by Circumcision that the Saints have by Baptism for so the Apostle intimates in Col. 2. 11. 12. Again pag. 18. speaking of Baptism We shall find saith he beating it out as far as the Scripture gives light that as it seals and confirms our union with him so it also seals and confirms to us the most desirable thing in the world which is the pardon of all our sins Now we know that the remission or pardon of sin and the righteousnesse of faith are Termini convertibiles sive aequivalentes words importing one and the same thing And yet again the same Authour and Book pag. 20. Now for this God hath formed an Ordinance on purpose to confirm and ratifie unto us the remission of sins and this is baptism therefore be not amazed but repent and be baptized The same Author delivereth the same Doctrine in the same discourse ten times over yea Master W. A. himself in his Treatise stiled some baptismal Abuses c. as the Reader will find in the latter part of this Treatise is not tender of breaking with his Tutour Mr. Fisher in this point although in the mean time he contradicts himself as well as his Teacher herein For if Baptism be a Seal of remission of sins it cannot be required on mans part for the obtaining of remission of sins it is not the property of a Seal to procure unlesse it be the ratification and confirmation of what is already procured or done And indeed Mr. Fishers notion which alloweth Baptism to be a Signe but denieth it to be a Seal is upon the matter contradictions to it self For certainly God signifieth nothing but what hath reality and truth of being If so then by what means soever he signifieth a thing he must needs seal ratifie and confirm the being of it But for the truth of the Consideration before us were it not granted by our adversaries in which respect it needeth no proof it might be clearly argued and evinced from that known Scripture Discription of Baptism wherein it is stiled The Baptism of repentance for the remission of sins Consectary If Circumcision under the Law was a Seal of the righteousness of Faith or of the remission of sins and Baptism under the Gospel be a seal likewise of the same righteousness then must children under the Gospel needs be as capable subjects of the latter seal I mean Baptism as they were of the former Circumcision under the Law CONSIDERATION XXVII JT was a gracious priviledge vouchsafed by God unto children under the Law to be admitted members of that Church-body which was most highly favoured and respected by him and amongst whom besides many other most great and pretious promises made unto them he promised to dwell for ever Proof Neither should we need to levy any proof of this Consideration if we had to do only with reasonable and considering men For if it were not a gracious priviledge unto children to be admitted members of such a body as that described then was the Ordinance of God enjoyning men the Circumcising of their children by which they became formal and compleat members of this Body either a kind of Idol Ordinance which did neither good nor evil to those who received and enjoyed it or else such an Ordinance wherein or whereby God intended evil unto them But as well the one as the other of those conceits are the abhoring of every Christian and considering Soul Ergo If it be said that Câ—rcumcision might benefit children in some other way though not by immembring them into the Iewish Church I Answer 1. It is not easie to conceive in what other way it should benefit them 2. What way soever may be thought upon wherein it should profit them otherwise Baptism must needs be conceived to be as profitable to them in the same 3. and lastly it is very unreasonable and importune and not worthy a sober man to affirm or think that children had no priviledge or
benefit by being taken into communion and fellowship with that Church or people to whom God bare and shewed from time to time more and greater respects of Grace and love then to any other people under Heaven especially considering that the Apostle having demanded thus What advantage then hath the Jew or what profit is there of Circumcision returneth this answer to his question much every ways Rom 3. 1. Consectary If it were a priviledge of Grace unto children under the Law to be incorporated with the holy People and Church of God then in being then must it needs be a priviledge of like Grace unto children under the Gospel to be in like manner incorporated with Gospel Churches And consequently such Parents who are in a capacity of procuring this priviledge or blessing unto their children by causing them to be baptized and yet shall neglect or refuse to do it must needs be looked upon as Parents of hard bowels and un-Christianly injurious to their Children And if God should interpose by any prohibition of his against children in this behalf under the Gospel he also should be found by many degrees estranged in his care and affection from children since the comming of his own Son Jesus Christ in the flesh in comparison of his respects towards them under the Law especially considering that under the Gospel he hath not invested them with any other priviledge of like Grace and favour with that in-Churching them under the Law neither indeed are they investible with any like to it CONSIDERATION XXVIII VVHen the Jews through the just judgement of God were for their Sins cast off from being a Church or people any longer unto him their children were involved in the rejection as well as themselves I mean as well as their men and women and those who were Parents and had from henceforth no right to any Church Ordinance unlesse happily it be unto Baptisme and this in such cases and upon such terms onely as those specified Part. 2. of this discourse § 171. Proof This consideration also may well be numbred amongst those which carry self-evidence enough in themselves and need no labour of proof to commend their truth and some of our Re-Baptizers themselves do acknowledge it However most certain it is that circumcision with the whole retiâ—ue of the Mosaical or Levitical Ordinances depending hereon Gal. 5. 3. is abolished by the death of Christ and promulgation of the Gospel in which respect no person whether Jew or Gentile whether Parents or children are in any regular capacity of any of these Therefore if the Jewish Children under the rejection of their Nation or Parents be not in a capacity of Baptism they are in no capacity of any Church Ordinance whatsoever Consectary If the Jewish children were together with their Parents dis-franchised and deprived of their former rights and priviledges in respect of Church-membership and Church-Ordinances when their Parents were rejected by God and their Church state dissolved and abolished then can it not reasonably nor with any tolerable accord to the righteousnesse and goodnesse of God be imagined but that in case their Parents should repent and return unto God by Faith consequently be re-inchurched by him they also the children I mean should partake of this Grace and be together re-invested with them and consequently hereunto should by Baptism be members of the same Christian Churches respectively with them Yea it is the judgement and sence of some of our Adversaries and these not inconsiderable in their tribe that when the Jews shall return by faith unto him whom they have crucified and imbrace Christian Religion they will expect and demand Baptiâ—m for their children also Now there is no reason to think that the children of Jewish Beleevers as such should have any priviledge in Church affairs above the the children of Gentile Beleevers who by faith are the children of Abraham a well as they If so then are the children of these beleeving Gentiles regular subjects of the Ordinance of Baptism at the present as the children of the other the Jews will be when their Parents shall beleeve CONSIDERATION XXIX THe Jewish children were baptized into or unto Moses as well as their Parents in the cloud and in the Sea Proof This Assertion is the Apostles expresse Doctrine Moreover Brethren I would not that ye should be ignorant how that all our Fathers were under the cloud and all passed thorough the Sea And were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the Sea 1 Cor. 10. 1 2. Now 1. That by all our Fathers he means all the Jewish children at those times in being whereof he speaks as well as their Parenrs is evident Because those who were now children at the time of the Baptizing here spoken of were Fathers to the Jewish generation in Pauls time as well as those who were then men in as much as this generation descended from them who were then children as well as from their Parents Besides if the Jewish children now in being were not Baptized into Moses as well as their Parents by the Cloud and by the Sea then were they no whit ingaged to obey Moses in his conduct or government over them during their passage thorough the wildernesse upon the account either of the miraculous protection or direction of the cloud here spoken of or of their miraculous deliverance through the red Sea both being vouchsafed by God unto them under Moses his conduct for the confirmation of it unto them as being from himself I mean from God But this I presume is no mans thought therefore the children of the Jews as well as their Parents are affirmed by Paul to have been baptized into Moses by the means specified Consectary If all the Jewish children were baptized into Moses by the cloud and by the Sea then may all Christian children be by water baptized into Christ There can be nothing considerable objected against this consequence For 1. Moses was a typical Christ and his conduct or leading of the people unto Canaan was a typical leading of men to Heaven 2. The children of Christians are altogether as capable of being baptized by water into the true Moses I mean Christ as the children of the Jews were of being baptized by the cloud and by the Sea into their typical Christ I mean Moses nor can any material difference be shewed between the one case and the other If it be objected that the Jewish children are metaphorically onely and improperly said to have been baptized into Moses when as the baptizing into Christ is literal and proper I answer let this difference be admitted yet it no waies disableth the consequence in hand For what can there be required to give a capacity of a literal or proper baptism more then is required to give a like capacity of a metaphorical typical or mystical baptisme Nay in reason more should be required to qualifie for this then for the other For things literally and properly such
are more readily apprehended and conceived then things figuratively and mystically a M. Baxter affirmeth proveth this kind of baptizing to be no Ordinance of God but an heynous sin yea and flat murther and no better and upon this account judgeth that the Civil Magistrate ought to restrain it as being destructive to the lives â—f their people See this and much more tâ— like purpose p. 134. 135. 136. in his Plain Scripture Proof for Infants Church-membership c. such Therefore if children were capable of a metaphorical or typical baptism much more are they capable of that which is literal and proper So that the Scripture now argued is on the behalf of Infant-Baptisme like Solomons King upon his Throne against whom there is no rising up CONSIDERATION XXX THe ceremony or dore of entrance or admission into the Christian Church is lesse grievous or offensive to the flesh and more accommodate to the weaknesse and tendernesse of children then the ceremony of like import was under the Law Proof The Proof or evidence rather of this Consideration is neer at hand For the entrance into the Jewish Church under the Law was by blood which occasioned Zipporah to tell Moses that he was an Husband of blood to her Then she said A bloody Husband thou art because of the Circumcision which it seems she was necessitated to administer unto her child to save her Husbands life Exod. 4. 26. Whereas the ceremonial entrance into the Christian Church is by water and the washing of the flesh herewith Indeed as some form and obtrude this Ceremony upon the consciences of men the entrance into the Christian Church is made more bloody in many cases I mean more prejudicial unto health and more threatening life then that under the Law For though Circumcision was smarting and painful yet it made no breach upon the health nor endangered the life of any that came under it Whereas Bptizing in Rivers by plunging or dipping the whole body under water in cold climates and seasons must needs threaten not the healths onely but the lives also of many infirm and tender constitutions â— Yea I am all thoughts made that upon the account of this kind of Baptizing many amongst us at this day are sick and weak and many also have fallen asleep Several instances of persons who have suffered in these kinds have been reported unto me and this upon tearms sufficient to secure the truth of the reports Consectary If God admitted Infants into his Church when the entrance hereunto was more grievous and not without blood it is very unreasonable to conceive that he should now exclude them having made the entrance hereinto more accommodations unto them and much better comporting with their weakness CONSIDERATION XXXI IT cannot be proved from the Scriptures that the Baptism of any child born of Christian Parents or Beleâ—vers was deferred to adultness or years of discretion much less can it be provâ—d that the Baptism of all such children was thus deferred Proof If that which in this Consideration is implicitely denyed the deferring of Baptism to the persons specified can or could be proved from the Scriptures the proof must be either first by some example of an Infant one or more of the relation mentioned who was not baptized untill mans estate But evident it is that no such proof as this can be found in the Scriptures Or else 2. the said proof must be made by producing some prohibition of Divine Authority by which Beleeving Parents are restrained from desiring Baptisme for their children untill maturity of years But as certain it is that no proof in this kind neither can be found in the Scriptures Or 3. and lastly the proof we speak of must be made by producing some reason or ground otherwise from the Scriptures by which the necessity of such a Dilation is substantially evinced But neither do the Scriptures afford any proof of the point in question in this kind as our Adversaries themselves upon the matter as far as I understand do confesse in that they never yet produced any If it be objected and said though there be no particular or special prohibition in the Scriptures restraining Christians from desiring Baptisme for their children whilest they are yet children yet are their prohibitions in general laid as well upon them as others to restrain them from will-worship and so from using the Holy things of God in any manner not directed or prescribed by himself and consequently to restrain Beleeving Parents from offering their children whilest such unto Baptisme in as much as Infant-Baptisme is will-worship or an act or kind of worship not prescribed by him to this I answer That every usage of the Holy things of God after a manner not particularly prescribed by him is not will-worship To read a Chapter two or three daily is no will-worship yet is it an using of the Holy Scriptures nor particularly prescribed by God To give the Holy things of God in the Administration of the Supper unto women is an usage of these Holy things not particularly directed or prescribed by God himself yet it is far from Will-worship To pray about a quarter or half or an whole hour every day is an usage of the Holy Ordnance of prayer not particularly prescribed by God yet is it not Will-worship many instances in this kind might be added Therefore neither is the Baptizing of Infants any strein of Will-worship upon any such account as this viz. because it is an usage of an Ordinance not particularly prescribed by God 2. Will-worship properly consists in this when men exhibit or perform that in the name of worship or for worship unto God which he hath not prescribed as any part of his worship As they who conceit they worship God by being baptized men and women having formerly been baptized infants do most properly commit the sin of Will-worship because it is certain that God hath not prescribed any such things especially not in the nature of worship Yea it is a kind of Will-worship if Parents-place worship in offering their children unto Baptism because God doth not require this of them in the nature of worship but of obedience and duty otherwise All duty is not worship neither is every act not warrantable by the Scriptures though supposed such an act of Will-worship 3. And lastly it hath been proved by many arguments and grounds both in this discourse and in several others by other men that the mind and will of God is that Christian Parents should devote and consecrate their children by water unto his service upon the first opportunity from the beginning of their daies Which arguments and grounds have it may be some of them been replied unto instead of answered or had something said to them which emphatically considered amounts to nothing and others of them may probably in time be triumphed over in the same kind However evident it is in the mean time that no Christian Parent is restrained by any
Administration The reason is because God hath not subjected the Law of nature to the Law of any â—eremony or institution whatsoever but on the contrary hath subjected the respective laws of all ceremonies and institutions unto this a See §. 8. of the secâ—nd part of â—hâ— discourse and Watâ—r-dipping p. 5 6 7 CONSIDERATION XLV â—T was the manner and practise of Heathen Nations and Pagan Idolaters before Christs time to dip or wash all over the bodiâ—s of those who desired to be initiated into the superstitious and Idolatrous services of their Idolâ—â—ods Proof The truth of this Assertion is asserted by several Authors as well of the Pagan as Christian perswasion They who desire a more particular information hereof may please to consult the Commentaries of Hugo Grotius upon these words Mat. 28. 19. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Baptizing them where having himself first affirmed that the custome we speak of was practised among the Jews when any person turned from the worship of false Gods unto the true and again that it was used among prophane Nations likewise of old b S 〈…〉 Ostendiâ—â—us apud Judaeos moris â—isse ut Baptiâ—â—renâ—uâ— qâ—i se à falsorum Deorum cultu ad cultum unius Dâ—i convertebant Sed apud Gentes etiam prophanâ—s usurpatum antiquitùs fuit ut qui iâ—itiari vellâ—nt toto corpore prius ablueâ—entur c. he subjoins the testimony of sundry Authors for the confirmation of this latter Consectary If Dipping Religion-wise was by the Jews practised upon their own account and without direction and command from God and much more if it were practised by Pagan Idolaters and those who worshipped the Divel and this before Baptism was practised among Christians then is it at no hand probable that God should prescribe or enjoin the same practise unto those that should worship him and beleeve in his Son Jesus Christ The reason of this consequence is because God hath never been wont to learn of men much lesse of Sathan or his followers how to be worshipped himself or what services to prescribe unto his worshippers It hath indeed been observed long since that the Divel is Gods Ape and borroweth many things from him for the regulating adorning and compleating of his own worship but it never entred I suppose into any Christian mans heart to think that God should borrow any rite or ceremony from Sathan wherewith to accomplish his worship Yea we read in the Law that God expressely forbad his people the use of several rites and practises used by Idolaters and this for this very reason because they were used by them Lâ—vit 18. 3. Deut. 12. 30 31. Deut. 18. 14. Herewith compare Mat. 6. 31. 32. CONSIDERATION XLVI IT cannot be proved from the Scriptures that any Baptismal Administration recorded there was performed by dipping but it is exceeding probable that many of these Administrations were performed without it Proof Concerning the first part of this consideration I freely acknowledge that it is the sence and opinion of many learned men both of ancient and modern times that in Christs and the Apostles days the Administration we speak of was ordinarily in Judea and the hot countries neighbouring thereunto performed by dipping the whole body under water Yet I am all thoughts made that whatever ground they have or may have otherwise for this opinion they have nothing demonstrative or firmly concluding from the Scriptures to evince it That those metaphorical expressions of the Apostle Buried with him by Baptisme Rom. 6. 4. Col. 2. 12. amount to no such proof hath in two of our preceding Consideratâ—ons been argued That neither of these expressions about the baptizing of the Eunuch 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 translated they went down both INTO the Water And when they were come up OVT of the Water Act. 8. 38 39. prove the Eunuch to have been dipt under water in his baptizing hath been in part if not sufficiently proved already where by the testimony of more then two competent witnesses as likewise by Scripture insinuation it self we found the water wherein he was baptized to have been too shallow to entertain him upon such terms But besides when it is said they both went down 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the preposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth not always or necessarily in this place signifie into but sometimes unto which signification is as proper here as the other so that the clause may be rendred and they both went down to or VNTO the water i.e. to the waters side The preposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 oft signifieth to or unto and is accordingly translated 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. i. e. I am not sent but TO or VNTO the sheep c. Mat. 15. 24. So 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 VNTO himself Colos 1. 20. So also That you may be filled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with or rather unto as Beza rendreth it a Vt impleamini A D omnem usque plenitudinem illam Dei all the fulnesse of God Eph. 3. 19. Again 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 They went unto Lydia as Beza again translateth b Introierunt A D Lydiam Act. 16. 40. Once more every Scribe which is instructed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 VNTO the Kingdome of Heâ—ven Mat. 13. 52. to omit many other places Again for the latter clause And when they were come up 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 OVT OF the Water the preposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 might be as as well translated FROM as out of For this signification of it is most frequent and obvious in the New Testament and our English Translation accordingly owneth it in very many places They who doubt hereof may consult the original in these Texts with many others for their satisfaction Luk. 1. 71 and again v. 7 8. Luk. 20. 4. twice Joh. 19. 12. Joh. 21. 14. Act. 14. 8. Act. 15. 21 as Beza rendreth and v. 29. Act. 17. 3. and 31. Act. 22. 6. and v. 17 Act. 27. 34. Rom. 1. 17. Rom. 4. 24. Rom. 6. 4. and v. 9. and v. 13. and v. 17. c. It would be tedious and needlesse so much as to point at all those places where the preposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are found in the signification import of our English particle from And being so translated in the clause in hand as very commodiously and without any hardnesse at all of construction it might be for it is as proper to say when they came up from the Water as when they came up out of the Water here would be no footing nor colour of footing whereon to argue the Eunuchs diping when he was baptized Yea own we the two English translations of both the clauses now under consideration yet can there no convincing argument be drawn from them either divisim or conjunctim to prove that Philip dipped the Eunuch when he baptized him For supposing the water to have been very shallow for the proof whereof more I beleeve hath been said then
commodious for any considerable space together for people so to stand whether in the brink or verge of the water or else near to it that a person going along by them in the water may cast water upon them many thousands may be baptized within the compasse of a day or lesse Whereas to dip every person apart when there are several thousands to be baptized and but one to baptize is in the ordinary phrase an endlesse work The common exception which Mr. Fisher and others of his judgement insultingly make against this method or manner of baptizing in terming it a rantizing not a baptizing is pedantique and makes onely a sound without substance To argue that sprinkling with water is not a baptizing because it is a rantizing is such a kind of reasoning as this Socrates cannot be a living creature because he is a man Bucephalus is not a beast because he is an horse These are strange kinds of arguings wherein the genus is denied upon the account of the species or because the species is affirmed The Sacramental rite or Ordinance best known by the name of Baptisme is therefore in the Scriptures ordinarily thus called I mean Baptism and the administration of it a Baptizing because it is a generical term and more comprehensive then rantizing or sprinkling and importeth as hath been shewed any kind of washing whether by sprinkling or by pouring on water or by applying water to the thing or person to be washed after any other manner And washing being that externality which was chiefly minded by God in the administration of Baptism it is not material by or with what species or particular kind of washing it be performed And Calvin accordingly though his opinion be that at first it was administred with the submersion of the whole body under water yet placeth little in this modality of it and supposeth the administration of it in another manner as suppose by sprinkling pouring on water or otherwise to be no digression from the institution and rule of Christ a Ex his verbis colligere licet Baptismum fuisse celebratum a Johaune et Christo totius corporis submersione Quanquam de externo ritu minus anxie laborandum est modo cum spirituali veritate ac Domini instituto ac regulâ congruat Calvin in Joh. 3. 22. 23. But besides what the Scripture exhibiteth in favour of Baptismal sprinkling or pouring on water as the typical applications of bloud as well to persons as things under the law which were made for the most part by sprinkling it and sometimes by putting it on or anointing with it Exod. 12. 7. Exod. 29. 12. 20. Levit. 4. 7. Levit. 8. 23. 24. Levit. 14. 14. Levit. 16. 18. So again those prophetical expressions found in those two great Prophets Esa and Ezekiel the former prophecying of Christ that he should SPRINKLE many nations Esa 52. 15. the latter that God would sprinkle clean water upon the Church Ezek. 36. 25. or as the former translation read it I will pour clean water upon yâ—u which expressions are unquestionably allusive unto or rather expressive of the manner wherein Nations should be baptized into the obedience and service of Christ besides I say all the Scripture affordeth upon such accounts as these in countenance of sprinkling or pouring on water in baptizing the difficulties which attend Baptismal dippings are so insuperable and irreconcileable with the Law of nature and in this respect with the written Law of God it self at least in many cases formerly specified that either sprinkling or pouring on water must be allowed in the Administration of Baptism or else no Baptism administred at all This for the first reason why John made choice of such places for his Baptismal quarters where plenty of water was to be found Herein he consulted expedition and dispatch in his work of baptizing The latter reason of such his choice might respect as we said the spiritual and great end of Baptism which was and is to set forth commend and confirm the abundant Grace of God in cleansing men as well from the stain and filth as from the guilt of sin by Jesus Christ Now this grace of God being Sacramentally signified or represented by the element of water in Baptism the sight or beholding of a fair and large prospect of this element at the time of their baptizing might occasion or raise so much the greater and more lively apprehensions within them of the great aboundance of this grace of his towards them Whether these either one or both be the true reasons or no of John's pitching his Baptismal Tent so near unto rivers or currents of water most certain it is that both the one and the other are of a more reasonable and probable calculation then that which maketh conveniency of dipping the ground hereof This is a dull and spiritlesse conceit as hath been shewed And thus we have given a large and full account of truth in the former part of the Consideration last propounded which affirmeth that it cannot be proved from the Scriptures that any Baptismal Administration recorded here was performed by dipping For I know nothing pleaded by any man to prove the contrary beyond what hath been now answered We shall not need to insist upon any proof of the latter part of the Consideration which onely beareth that it is exceeding probable that many of the said Administrations were performed without dipping For if so be there be so little probability as hath been argued that so much as any one of these Administrations were performed by dipping there must needs be a like or rather a far greater degree of probability that some of them at least have been performed without More especially where we read of great multitudes or of several thousands baptized together or at one and the same time it is hardly reconcilable with the lowest terms of probability to imagine that they were all dipt And those arguments and reasons by which the dipping of the Jaylour and his house when they were baptized is indeavoured to be salved are not worthy reasonable or considering men It was about midnight when they were baptized Act. 16. 33. with v. 25. and this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 straiâ—way or immediately upon the washing of Paul and Silas their wounds or stripes It is but an hungry shift to suppose that the Jaylor might be provided with some vessel fit for bathing and washing the whole body If this be supposed it must yet be super-supposed that there was a sufficient quantity of water at hand to fill it or else the former supposition will not do the feat If this also be supposed it must yet further be supposed likewise that they were dipped either naked or with their garments on them The former of these is an hard supposition and will not I suppose down with sober men If the latter be supposed it must be supposed yet again that either they shifted themselves out of their wet garments
by sprinkling or pouring water upon it is a nullity or that a person is never the more consecrated unto this service for his being sprinkled or washed with water in his infancy and that in this respect a person comming to maturity of years and beleeving ought to be consecrated to this service as if nothing at all had been done unto him upon this account formerly thus I say to pretend or plead is to dictate a mans own notion and conceit not to speak the words of sobernesse and truth or any thing that can be proved from the Scriptures These no where determine Inâ—ant-Baptism to be a nullity neither in respect of any incapacity in the person baptized nor in respect of any mis-application of the element whether applied by sprinkling or affusion Yea it hath been proved elsewhere I suppose above all reasonable contradiction that infant-baptism whether administred by sprinkling or affusion although for my part I never knew any administration in this kind made by sprinkling is for all Baptismal ends and purposes as efficacious and valid as the baptizing of men after what manner soever b See Water-dipping c. Consideration 16. p. 24. 25. c. Consectary If the practise of Re-baptizing cannot be justified by the word of God then must it needs be either an humane device or delusion of Sathan CONSIDERATION XLXIX. THe custome or practise of adult Baptism or of deferring Baptism unto maturity of years amongst those who were born in the Church and amongst whom Baptism was used as in the case of Constantine Austin and some others mentioned in Church History first entred into the Church by an unhallowed dore and was entertained upon unwarrantable and Popish grounds Proof The truth of this Assertion sufficiently appeareth by the light of the records of Antiquity So that whereas some of the Anti-pedo-Baptistical party ridiculously and contrary to the main current of all sound Ecclesiastical Records of primitive date bear poor ignorant people in hand that I know not who what or which Pope Innocent should be the first who commanded children to be baptized the truth is that they were Popish grounds haply in conjunction with some others no whit better which made the first breach upon infant-Baptism formerly practised and this generally in the Christian Churches as is elsewhere proved and prevailed with some to put off the baptâ—ing of their children and with others their own baptizing untill maturity of years yea with some untill the apprehended approaches of death Much might be gathered and cited from the writings of the fathers upon this account Tertullian seems to have been the first who perswaded Christians to delay Baptism especially the Baptism of their children until afterwards a Itaque pro cujusque conditione ac dispositione etiam aetate cunctatio Bapâ—ismi utilior est praecipue tamen circà parvulos Quid festinat innocens aetas ad remissi nem peccatorum Tertul. de Baptismo c. 18. which by the way clearly proveth that Infant-Baptisme was ordinarily practised in his times But the grounds upon which he perswadeth to such a practise are very sandie and loose and the principal of them viz. that Remission of sins whereof children being innocent have no need is obtained by or at least conferred in Baptism is at this day by those at least the generality of those who are reputed Orthodox amongst Protestants adjudged Popish and erroneous and besides seemeth to suppose that there is no other end of Baptism but onely the obtaining forgivenesse of sins or that Baptisme ought not to be administred except onely in such cases where all the ends thereof may presently be obtained Besides this motion of Tertullian for the delay of Baptism was in all likelihood much promoted amongst Christians by means of some impressions which the consciences of some had taken of the Novatian error fearing lest in case of sin after Baptism they should be uncapable of Repentance and consequently of salvation it self The opinion also which many Professors about these times had drank in that all their sins should be remitted in their Baptism in conjunction with a corrupt desire to injoy the pleasures of sin as long as they could without danger as they supposed together with a perswasion that they were onely once to be baptized contributed much towards the entertainment of Tertullians Doctrinal advice with many as may be plainly gathered from several passages in Basil's Exhortation unto Baptism But whatsoever his grounds or reasons were for this his Doctrine of Baptismal delaies the pious and learned fathers after him especially Basil and Nazienzen adjudged them altogether insufficient zealously exhorting to a contrary practise Hast thou an Infant saith Nazienzen let nâ—t impiety be gratified with an opportunity let it be sanctified from its infancy let it be consecrated unto the Holy Ghost from the very first sprouting of the nails of it a Infans tibi est ne occasionem improbitas arripipiat ab infantia sanctificetur ab ipsis unguiculis spiritui consecretur Greg. Nazienzen Orat. 40. in Sanctum Baptisma with much more to the same purpose And Basil expresly taught his hearers that the whole life of a man was a time for Baptism b Baptismi verò tempus vita horinis tota Basil in Exhort ad Baptismum meaning that it might be administred and received at any time from the womb to the grave Yea Tertullian himself clearly approveth of the Baptizing of infants in case of necessity Consectary If the custome of adult Baptism where children were born of Christian Parents was first brought into the Church and entertained upon Popish and unwarrantable grounds then was it not practised by Christ or his Apostles but is rather Popish and Anti Christian CONSIDERATION L. THat Generation of men best known amongst us by the name of ANA-BAPTISTS have alwaies been injurious to the Gospel and obstructive to the course and free passage of it in the world Proof Peter speaking of Christ saith To him give all the Prophets witnesse Act. 10. 43. As all the ancient Prophets give testimony unto Christ so do all or very many of the latter Prophets I mean those worthy instruments by whom God hath inlightned the world in and since the Reformation began by Luther given testimony against that generation of men we speak of as men by whose unworthinesse in several kinds the interest of the Gospel hath deeply suffered in the world The course of the Gospel saith Scultetus Decad. 1. Anno. 1525. was this year hindered and obstructed in Zuitzerland and Moravia by the Anabaptistical sect Elsewhere speaking of the Church of Saintgal he saith it was variously exercised or disturbed by the Anabaptists Elsewhere he writes that these Anabaptists were extreamly troublesome to the Christians in the two Cities of Ulme and Augusta or Auspurg in the lower Suevia Again writing of the year 1527. he saith this year the Anabaptistical and Sacramentary wars or quarrels were very hot to thâ— great damage
where it comes Nor hath God ordinarily blessed the Ministery of the Anabaptists to the true conversion of souls as he hath done other mens but rather they have been instruments of the Churches scandal and misery a Pag. 138. Afterwards But alas what need we look into other Kingdomes to enquire whether the fire be hot when we are burning in it or to know the nature of that poison that is working in our bowels and which is striving to extinguish the life of Church and State England is now the Stage where the doleful tragedy is acting and the eyes of all reformed Churches are upon us as the miserable objects of their compassion b Pag. 143. A little after I have had opportunity to know too many of these called Anabaptists and to be familiar with them And having first examined my heart lest I should wrong them out of any disaffection through difference in judgement as I clearly discover that I bear no ill-will to any one man of them nor ever did nor find any passion but compassion moving me to say what I do so I do impartially and truly affirm concerning the most of them that I have conversed with as followeth 1. That I have known few of them so much as labour after the winning of souls from sin unto God but the main scope of their indeavours in publick and private is to propogate their opinions And if they do preach any plain wholesome Doctrine it is usually but subservient to their great design that the Truth may be as Sugar to sweeten their errors that they may be the easilier swallowed c. c Pag. 144. Afterwards he compares the Doctrine and practise of those Anabaptists who indeavour to perswade the people that it is sinfull for them to hear or join with their Teachers being unbaptized men with the most mischievous Doctrine and insinuation of the Papists whose onely strength he saith amongst us is to make the people beleeve it is a sin to hear us or join with us and then they are out of all waies of recovery they may make them beleeve any thing when no body contradicteth it d Pag. 145. A little after this Moreover that very scandal of these mens opinions and practises hath been an unconceivable hindrance to the successe of the Gospel and the salvation of multitudes of souls Oh how it stumbleth and drives off the poor ignorant people from Religion when they see those who have seemed Religious prove such And going on he sheweth how the Papists are hardned the Episcopal party confirmed the Kings party which began to stagger at their cause now perswaded of the lawfulnesse of it meerly from the miscarriages of these men All this with much more the worthy man reporteth bewailingly out of his own knowledge and experience of the way which is called Anabaptism together with those who walk in it and occasionally all along sheweth the impertinency and weaknesse of whatsoever can with any colour of Reason be pretended to ease the burthen laid upon them So that there is little question to be made but that the progress of the Gospel in those parts of the European world where the late Reformation of Christian Religion ever set foot hath been more obstructed and retarded by the unsound Doctrines and extravagant practises of Rebaptizers then by the irregularities or disorders of any other sect Consectary If the way of Ana-baptism with those who uphold and walk in it have alwaies been injurious to the Gospel and obstructors of the course and passage of it in the world it is at no hand to be conceived to be from God because then God should be divided in and against himself CONSIDERATION LI. THe Wrath of God hath been from time to time revealed from Heaven against the way of Ana-baptism and those who un-repentingly have walked in it Proof The wrath of God is commonly revealed with an high hand in one or more or all of these waies 1. By deliveing men and women up to an injudicious mind or to beleeve lies and untruths 2. By delivering them up to vile affections and practises suitable 3. And lastly by pursuing them with ruinating judgements That God hath plainly witnessed from Heaven against the way and practise of Anabaptism in all these several ways may be sufficiently evinced from the reports and testimonies of many witnesses beyond exception yea I suppose by all persons of worth and conscience who in all places where any considerable numbers of men have been ingaged in this way have been diligent observers of what hath passed between the providence of God and them and withall have had occasion to record what they observed in this kind for the use of present and future ages For the first that Anabaptism hath been and is the ordinary harbinger to other fond fantastick uncouth and pernicious opinions and prepares their way into the minds and judgements or fancies rather of men and women who suffer themselves to be insnared with it hath been the observation of former times and is the experience of our own Calvin in his Preface to his Brief Instruction for the fortifying of Beleevers against the Errors of the common sect of the Ana-baptists gives this account of this his writing vâ—z that many religious persons came unto him and told him that there was a book sent from remote parts which required his answer unlesse thâ— ruine of many souls were pleasing to him a Nisi multarum animarum interitus mihi gratus esset The Treatise it selâ— he begins in these words If I should intena to write against all the errors and opinions of the Anabaptists I should undertake a long work and enter a gulf from whence I should nâ—ver get out For this rabble of men herein differ from all â—ther Sects of Hereticks that they do not erre in some certain points onely but are a kind of immense or vast sea of portentuouâ— phrensies insomuch that it is hard to find the Head of any one Anabaptist which differs not in some conceit or other from all the râ—st Sâ— that thâ—re would be no end of my discourse if I meant tâ— examine yea or so much as recite all the impious Doctrines and opinions of this Sect. b Si adversùs omnes errores falsas opiniones Anabaptistâ—rum scribere vellem longum opus susciperem atque ingrederer abyssum uâ—de mihi exitus non pateret Nam ista colluvies ab alijs haerâ—ticorum sâ—ctis in eo diffâ—rt quòd non tanâ—um câ—â—tis in râ—bus erravâ—rit verum sitimmensum quod am stâ—pendorâ—â— deliriâ—rum â—â—re adeò utvix â—nius Anabaâ—tista caput reperiri possit quod non sit imbutum aliquâ— opinione diversa a reliquis Itaque nullus esset operi finis si iâ—pias omnes huâ—us Sectae Doctrinâ—â— excutere aut etiam recitare vellem Soon after distinguishing this sect into two sorts and acknowledging the one though full fraugâ—t with many impious and pernicious errors
no firm footing for Church-communion pag. 25 26. Experience likewise informeth us that great numbers of those who walk under their Infant-Baptism onely do altogether as conscienciously both own discharge all Baptismal engagements and withall in every whit as ample manner injoy all Baptismal comforts and priviledges as those who glory and please themselves most in their way of re-baptizing Yea experience further teacheth that very many of those who have gone under water upon an hope conceived of finding more grace and peace there then their infant Baptism had conferr'd upon them have lost much of the former by the voyage and it is exceeding much to be feared have not at all increased the latter if not susteined losse in this also Consectary If Baptism received in infancy though without dipping be neither a nullity nor an institution or device of man then must after-after-baptism unto those who have been infant-baptized be either the one or the other I mean either a nullity or an instituted device of man The reason of this consequence is because the Scripture which onely hath power originally to declare the reality and truth of a divine Ordinance hath declared nothing in this kind on the behalf of a second or after-Baptism Postscript CONSIDERATION V. Omitted under the fifth Head BAptism as all types and typical Ordinances is one of those things which are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. which have been instituted and given by God for the sake of and in reference unto some other thing of greater and more weighty concernment unto men then themselves Proof This Consideration is greater in evidence then exception or doubt even without proof For that Baptism is a typical Ordinance and according to the counsel and intention of the great father and founder of it given in subservience to ends and purposes of higher consequence then it self is I suppose the sence and joint consent of those who disturb the peace of the Christian world about it Or however the thing is fully evident from that known description of it in the Gospel wherein it is termed the Baptisme of Repentance for the remission of sins of which more largely in the latter part of this discourse Now all typical Ordinances are appointed or prescribed and given by God unto men either 1. For the teaching and instructing them in something that is more spiritual and secret or 2. For the confirming and securing them touching either the certainty and truth of things already past or the injoyment of good things according to the promise of God yet to come or 3. For the reminding them of something that is absent or 4. And lastly for the ingaging them to some future action kind or course of acting There may possibly be other ends of typical institutions besides these but these onely at present come to mind However when the end or ends for which any such Ordinance as those of which we now speak was appointed be once obtained and injoied by men whether by the use of this Ordinance or without it for God is at liberty to work his good pleasure in men and for men without any Ordinance though men be not left at liberty to omit them in their respective seasons nor to neglect or despise them at any time the use or further use of such an Ordinance is not required by God nor can it in the use of it be of any consequence benefit or concernment unto men Now concerning Baptism let the ends of it be supposed what men reasonably can suppose or imagine them to be they are all obtained and enjoyed by many by means of that Baptism or Consecration unto Christ by Water which was administred unto them in their infancy and which they stil own and in the strength and conscience whereof they still walk without any other Baptism received by them afterwards as I have fully demonstrated pag 24 25 26 27. of my Discourse intituled Water-dipping c. Consectary If Baptism was not ordained by God for it self or for the bare letters sake of it but for ends and purposes spiritually beneficial unto men then cannot the receiving of it afterwards be any waies commodious unto them who by means of their Infant-Baptism or otherwaies are actually possessed of these ends nor doth God require a subjection unto it of such men The Second Part. BEING A modest Examination of Mr. William Allen's Arguments pretending clearly to prove as himself expresseth it the Invalidity of the Administration of Baptism to Infants Sect. 1. I Trust that Mr. A. notwithstanding the great disservice he hath done I presume not out of a worse Conscience then what want of light in the particular rendreth it unto God in the affaires of Jesus Christ and the Gospel by publishing his Baptismal abuses hath yet so much interest in him as to be heard by him in that Christian and worthy Petition in the close of his Premonition viz. that God will give unto his Reader so much light as to discern that which is of him from that which is but of men Nor am I without all hope but that this prayer of his will unto many of his Readers turn to a soveraign Antidote against the danger and infection of his following discourse For if God shall vouchsafe so much light unto any man as to dâ—scern that which is of God in this piece from that wâ—ich is but of men there is not much fear that his judgement will be over-ruled by the arguments to espouse the conclusion commended by them It is a saying too hard for my spirit nor of any good comportment with my respects to the Author yet was it the saying of a judicious and sober Christian both in my hearing and in the hearing of some others that they never met with so many Scriptures within so narrow a compasse more abused then those levied by Mr. A. to fight the battel of that cause which he laboureth to assert in his book But though I cannot with confidence rise up to the height of such a saying or censure yet very possibly they who spake the words might speak them with truth Sect. 2. He enters his Discourse with this Observation that That which boâ—h busies the minds and takes up much time among the servants of God in debates is that question about Baptism viz. which Administration is most agrâ—eable to the mind of God whether that which is made to Infants or whether that which not made but unto persons who either iâ—deed beleeve the Gospel or make profession so to do I confesse that the businesse of Baptism doth indeed much if not much too much busie the minds of many in these days as Circumcision also did the minds of many of old But as the great Apostle Paul though circumcised himself according to the Law of God yea and upon occasion an Administrer of it unto others yet severely rebuked yea and wished the cutting off of those that stickled for the practise
next place we deny that the reasons of their forbearance are binding unto us until 1. They be declared and made known to us what they were and 2. Untill it be proved that those reasons upon which they forbear in case they did forbear have the same influence upon or relation unto us which they had upon and unto them For it is not reasonable that we should suspend or forbear the doing of that which we conceive to be a duty and that upon such grounds which were never yet at least to our judgements sufficiently answered or disproved onely because it was not done or rather because some conceive it was not done in the days of Christ and the Apostles especially considering that we are able to give a competent account at least to our selves yea and we suppose to others also who are not too deeply baptized into a spirit of prejudice and partiality which in such a case as this we judge sufficient why they did or might forbear in case it should be proved that they did forbear in this kind This account we briefly mentioned § 15. and may somewhat inlarge upon it in place convenient In the mean time we clearly see that hitherto Mr. A. hath onely cleared doubts by darknesse and by the reason or proof exhibited hath mediated no good accord between the consequent and Antecedent in his major proposition For were both these granted 1. That John and the Apostles did forbear infant-infant-baptism in their daies and 2. That that which was a reason unto them to forbear it ought to be a reason unto all men now to forbear it viz. in case all men had the same reason now I mean were under the influence or command of the same or the like reason yet doth it no waies follow from hence that therefore if they forbear infant-infant-baptism all men ought to forbear it now The reason of the non-sequitur is because God may subject one man or some men to a necessity of some forbearance by such a reason in individuo or in actu excercito as the School-men speak by which all men are subjected to the like forbearance in specie or in actu signato who yet may never actually or in individuo be subjected hereunto by this reason As for example the command of God o◠the motion of the spirit of God in men to forbear such or such a practise is in specie and in the general equally binding unto all men as to this forbearance All men are alike bound I mean one man is bound as well as another to obey every command of God that shall be directed to him or imposed on him But in case such a command be directed and given unto some particular men and not unto others and there is the same consideration of an inward motion of the spirit it doth not follow that because the former are bound by it to the supposed particular forbearance that therefore the latter viz. to whom this command is not given should be bound likewise though the command of God simply considered be alike binding unto all Therefore in case John and the Apostles were moved by the spirit of God to forbear the baptizing of Infants which I presume Mr. A. himself will not deny and upon this motion did forbear it it doth not follow from their being moved hereunto that those who are not moved as they were are or should be bound by their motion to the like forbearance Particular motions of Gods spirit unto actions and there is the same reason of forbearances also either besides or contrary unto standing and known rules or laws bind no man but onely those particularly inspired and moved by them either to the actions or forbearances unto which these persons are moved or led by them But that as well John the Baptist as the Apostles did forbear the baptizing of infants in case it be supposed that they did forbear it which was never yet substantially proved nor I beleeve ever will be by special and particular direction or motion of the Holy Ghost and not otherwise is clearly demonstrable by this argument Either upon the said supposition they did forbear it by particular and expresse motion from the Holy Ghost or else by some standing order rule or direction recorded in the Scriptures or else by the motion or guidance of their own spirits But they forbear it not upon either of these latter accounts Therefore their forbearance upon the supposition mentioned was by extraordinary and particular motion of the Holy Ghost If Mr. A. will say that their forbearance was grounded upon any general or standing law or rule of Scripture let him produce such whether law or rule from hence whereby men are prohibited or restrained from baptizing infants If he shall do this the controversie between him and his Antagonists about Infant-Baptism will soon be at an end That the said persons John and the Apostles did not forbear infant-Infant-Baptism out of the private dictate or motion of their own spirits Mr. A. I presume will not affirm in which respect it needs no proof Sect. 17. But whereas we might here regularly have expected to see the reasons why as Mr. A. pretends Baptism was not administred unto infants in the daies of John c. behold quite another vision He turns another way and falls upon inquiry what reasons we should or can have to baptize infants which they had not as though he would imply that he had shewed what reasons they had and would go somewhat further viz. to see whether we had or possibly might have any other And thus whilest we were in expectance of some arguments from him to confirm his argument he hath slidden from us like a Serpent over a rock and we find him again creeping in at a whole on the other side But let us follow him at this turn also and draw him forth into the light He makes an enumeration or recital of five reasons which may be pretended for infant-baptism now and which some may think were not obligatory unto them John the Apostles c. and closeth with confidence more then enough as if he had surveyed the round world and all that is therein Other reasons then these cannot lightly be supposed or imagined ever to come up into the minds of men Mr. A. was not comprehensive enough at this turn there are several reasons here which lie without the verge or circle of his imagination here two of which have been already mentioned and shall upon this occasion be again repeated and a little further opened Sect. 18. 1. We may be in a better and more convenient capacity for baptizing infants now then they were because the Apostles yea and Christ himself had a businesse of far greater weight and moment lying upon their hand then baptizing not onely infants but even beleevers themselves viz. the planting of the Gospel in the world the constituting and inspection of Churches c. in comparison of which the businesse of baptizing whether
accordingly Sect. 43. Against his fifth proof p. 8. there is matter of exception enough to make a little volume For 1. What if the instructions gâ—vâ—n to those who were commissioned to baptize and the practise of such persons who did baptize argue the persons i. e. some of the persons for he was tender of saying all for fear of after-claps that were baptized by them to have been no infants Doth it follow because all that were baptized were not Infants therefore none that were baptized were such Or that they who had instructions to baptize persons of ripe years had no instructions or commission to baptize any others 2. Whereas he saith that the instruction which Christ gave those whom he commissiâ—ned on this bâ—half was that they should first teach persons â—r make them Disciples and then baptize them I confesse he mentioneth teaching in the first place and baptizing after but this is not to instruct them to teach in the first place and then to baptize them after but onely in the first place to instruct them to teach and in the second to baptize And such an expression of Christ as this is so far from proving that therefore all that are or ought to be baptized ought to be taught first that it doth not prove that any one person who is or ought to be baptized must be first taugâ—t however it be granted that this latter viz. that some are and ought to be taught before baptized may both by other Scriptures and by ground in reason be evinced for truth But there is nothing more frequent or familiar in the Scriptures then to find such things mentioned or â—amed â—n the first place which according to the order of nature and sometimes of time it self should be mentioned after Gal. 5. 22. love jâ—y peace c. are mentioned before faith 2 Cor. 13. 14. The second person is mentioned before the first as Revel 1. 4 5. the third before the second Rom. 10 9. confession with the mouth is named before beleeving with the heart Ezek. 14. 14. Daniel is named before Job who notwithstanding was long after him in time so Mic. 7. 20. Jacob before Abraham Levit. 12. 8. The burnt offering is first mentioned but the Sin-offering though after-named was alwaies first offered In the businesse of regeneration water is mentioned before the Spirit Joh. 3. 6. and Mar. 1. 4. Baptizing it self is mentioned before the preaching of baptism John did baptize in the Wildernesse and preach the Baptism of Repentance c. Therefore from Christs mentioning teaching in the first place and baptizing in the second it cannot be proved that persons must alwaies be first taught before they be baptized no more then from the Apostles informing the Corinthians in the first place that they were sanctified and in the second that they were justified 1 Cor. 6. 11. it can be proved that their sanctification did in time precede their justification Sect. 44. 3. Though nothing can be inferred from our Saviours mentioning teaching in the first place and baptizing after touching the necessity of teaching to go alwaies or indeed at any time before baptizing yet if we speak of baptizing nations of which it is a clear case that Christ here speaketh it is granted upon another account that teaching alwaies ought to precede baptizing my meaning is that no nation nor any person or numbers of persons in a nation ought to be baptized untill the Gospel hath been preached unto or in this nation and withall received and beleeved But this at no hand proveth but that in case the heads of a family one or more in a nation shall receive the Gospel and be baptized themselves their children also if they have any may be baptized likewise In this sence it is granted that tâ—acâ—ing ought alwaies to go before baptizing the teaching of nations before the baptizing of nations and so the teaching of families the baptizing of families that is the generallity of a nation and so of a family old and young men and children ought not to be baptized until those who are capable of teaching in both have been taught yea and have learned too to some degree the things which have been taught them But 4. Whereas he useth these two expressions as synonymous or of like signification to teach persons and to make them Disciples he maketh black and white the same colour and fire and water the same Element For Stephen taught those and this with great authority wisdom and faithfulnesse who stoned him to death yet made none of them Disciples So Paul taught many Jews at Damascus and elsewhere whom he could not make Disciples To teach and to make Disciples differ upon the matter as much as sowing disfers from reaping or fighting from conquering Whereas he addeth The practise of those who did baptizâ— was answerable to this Commission they first instructed person in the things Gospel and then baptized them I suppose his meaning is not that they baptized all whom they first instructed in the things of the Gospel but onely those who voluntarily offered themselves unto Baptism or desired it after they had been thus instructed they compelled no man to be baptized neither threatned they any man or delivered any man up unto Sathan for not being baptized But that when they first brought the Gospel to a family City or Country they first instructed before they baptized is easily granted and fully accords with our sence and notion in the premises Sect. 45. And thus we see how much and to how little purpose much hath been said by Mr. A. for the confirmation of the minor proposition in his first Argument viz. that Baptism was not administred to any Infant neither in the daies of John the Baptist nor of the Apostles We have both weighed his arguments for confirmation in the ballance of the Sanctuary and found them light or wanting and given you others for infirmation of them of sufficient weight In the Rear of this his first argument pag. 8 9 c. he frameth two objections against himself and essaieth a solution of them respectively but with no better successe then some novice practitioners in the Black Art who sometimes raise such stubborn spirits which their skill failing them they are not able to conjure down He hath not in either of his answers infringed nor indeed so much as touched the spirit or strength of either of the objections as they are manageable both against his argument but especially not as they are manageable for the cause of infant-Infant-baptism This we shall God willing demonstrate in due time and place viz. when we come to argue our grounds for the baptizing of Infants However when the grounds and reasons which are held forth and pleaded for the justification either of an opinion or practise are evicted of weaknesse and insufficiency no answering of objections is able to repair their strength or releeve them A man may answer and this very substantially two and ten objections
not forth the best fruit or the most fruit that is possible for a tree yea or for it self to bring forth Or were all the rest of the Apostles corrupt things because the Apostle Paul laboured more abundantly then they all a 1 Cor. 15. 10. and so promoted the end or ends of Apostolick mission above them all Or may not he truly and cordially seek to excell to the edifying of the Church who sometimes edifieth the Church lesse by his labours and indeavours in this kind then at some other time But when propositions are false proofs cannot be pertinent And thus through a manifest defectivenesse in the major proposition the glory of Mr. A's second argument against Infant-baptism is laid in the dust Neither is there any hope or possibility of releef from the minor proposition though this should be found never so Orthodox For it is a soveraign maxime in argumentation as hath been formerly said that Conclusio semper sequitur deteriorem partem the proof of a conclusion by a syllogism is never valid or strong when either of the propositions therein are weak So that we might wave the examination of the minor proposition in the argument before us without any detriment to our cause at all Notwithstanding to make it evident even to prejudice and partiality themselves if it be possible that there is no sound part in the whole body of this argument let us arraign the minor proposition also at the Bar of reason and truth The tenour of this proposition as we heard is this But that administration of baptism which is made to professed Beleevers doth more conduce to and better answer the ends of Baptism then that which is made to infants Sect. 49. That Truth is a sufferer in this proposition also is to me sufficiently evident from hence viz. because God himself who questionlesse knows much better then Mr. A. or any of his judgement what administration of an Ordinance most conduceth unto and best answers the ends of it judged the administration of Circumcision an Ordinance of like import with Baptism as shall upon occasion be shewed God willing elsewhere unto Infants more conducing unto and better answering the ends of it the principal of which was to signifie and seal the righteousnesse of Faith Rom. 4. 11. then unto Beleevers or unto persons of ripe years Otherwise I presume he would not have ordered the ordinary and constant administration of it unto children but rather unto men For it is very importune and burthensome to my Faith to beleeve that God should appoint such an administration of his Ordinance which should be in any degree disadvantagious or prejudicial to the ends thereof If therefore the administration of Circumcision made unto Infants under the Law did as much or more conduce unto the ends thereof as this administration made unto men could have done in like manner the administration of baptism made to infants under the Gospel must needs more or as much conduce unto the ends therof as it would do in case it were made unto men They who think write or say otherwise do they not make themselves wiser then God How and in what respect one or more that administration of Baptism which we prefer conduceth as much or more to the ends of Baptism as that administration which Mr. A. commendeth might readily here be shewed and may be in time convenient In the mean time let us consider how Mr. A. maketh his rope stand right up on the one end Sect. 50. 1. Saith he One end of Baptism is to declare Jesus Christ unto the world Joh. 1. 31. And a little after this manifestation of Christ is better made by the Baptism of Beleevers then by the Baptism of Infants whether it respects the party who is baptized or others who behold it For answer 1. The end indeed of John's sending to the Jews to baptize was that Christ should be made manifest unto Israel This the words cited by himself Joâ— 1. 31. expresly affirm But this proveth not that therefore the end of Baptism is to declare Jesus Christ unto the world Baptism and John's sending to the Jews to baptize are two very different things and so are Israel and the world Nor was Christ declared unto the world but unto Israel onely by John's baptizing Yea when John himself saith that he therefore came baptizing with water that Christ might be made manifest unto Israel his meaning is not that the manifestation of Christ no not to Israel was the proper end of that Baptism which he administred but of his administration of it the manner and terms upon which he came to administer it and according unto which he did administer it considered For had the same Baptism which John administred been administred by an ordinary person or a man ignorant who Christ was or that he was now come into the world yea or without those or the like additional discoveries which John made of Christ in his preaching it would never have produced any such effect as the manifestation of Christ unto Israel nor was there any thing in it any wayes proportionable unto such an end or effect as this Therefore certainly the manifestation of Christ unto the world is no end of Baptism or however no such end as this can be proved from John 1. 31. which text notwithstanding is our whole allowance for our satisfaction therein Sect. 51. By the way the reason I conceive why John being the messenger of Christ sent before his face to prepare his way i. e. to awaken the Jewish nation to own and entertain him being now come unto them though as yet they knew it not came baptizing with water in order to the manifestation of him unto the Jews was because this new undertaking to baptize was a proper means to occasion the generality of this people to inquire more diligently after him John I mean to examine more narrowly his Commission and authority by which he did baptize By means of which inquiry they came to understand that he was a man sent from God unto them and consequently could not but so much the more reverence and beleeve the words of his mouth the first born of which was the testimony which he gave of their Messiah as now ready to discover himself unto such of them as desired his comming Upon this account John's baptizing with water might contribute towards the manifestation of Christ unto Israel and yet the manifestation of Christ to the world be no end of Baptism simply considered or in its ordinary or standing administrations 2. Reason it self interposeth with an high hand against such a conceit which maketh the manifestation of Christ unto the world one of the ends of Baptism If Christ be in baptism he is here onely tanquam in aenigmate darkly and as in a riddle and he that doth not plough with Gods Heifer the Scripture will never know or understand this Riddle In this case it is not the Riddle but the heifer
then all those who were not baptized by John although afterwards baptized by Christ or his Disciples must be supposed to have perished eternally But certain it is that all those who rejected that counsel of God and continued in this rejection which the Priests and Elders are here said to have rejected against themselves especially having like means with them to imbrace it did perish eternally Therefore nothing can be more plain then that they sit down quite besides the mind of the Holy Ghost in this text of Scripture who conceive the counsel of God here mentioned to respect Johns baptism or any mans being baptized by him Sect. 58. Besides the present unbeleef and wicked frame of heart of the Preists and Elders considered they did not so much as sin in not coming to John to be baptized as Turks and infidels during their infidelity do not sin in not offering themselves either to Baptism or to the Lords Table among Christians albeit it is true that they sin in neglecting to put themselves into a regular capacity of offering themselves both to the one and the other Therefore certainly it was not the counsel of God that the Priests and Elders under that irregularity of heart which they had at present contracted should have heen baptized by John inasmuch as this had been a manifest prophanation in them of this great Ordinance although I do not conceive that John had sinned in baptizing them in case they had desired it of him Nor is it any part of the counsel of God that men should sin or act any thing to their own condemnation The result of the late premises is that the sin of the Priests and Elders in rejecting the counsel of God so termed in the words before us against themselves did not consist in their not being baptized by John but in rejecting their Messiah the Lord Christ sent unto them and that their refusal of being baptized by John having been invited and exhorted unto Faith and Repentance by his ministry was a sign or evidence of this their rejection Nor doth it follow that in case their refusing Baptism at the hand of John plainly argued their unbeleef therefore the accepting of baptism from him did in like manner argue the Faith and Repentance of all those who accepted it A remotione unius contrarij ad positionâ—m alterius non valet argumentum A continual blaspheming of the name of God demonstratively argueth a man to be desperately wicked and prophane but the forbearance of such blasphemies doth not prove a man to be truly pious or religious The sin of covetousnesse proveth a man or woman to be in the gall of bitternesse and band of iniquity but freedome from this sin doth not argue a man to be in a state of Grace or in favour with God Many like instances might be given We have done at last with Mr. A's first end of Baptism which he makes to be the manifestation of Christ unto the world and have proved 1. That this is no end of Baptism And 2. That granting it to be an end yet it is in all respects as effectually promoted as in some more by Infant-Baptism as by the Baptism of men-beleevers Sect. 59. He proceeds and tells us pag. 15. of another end or use of Baptism which he terms the serving the design of God touching the great businesse of Repentance for the remission of sins And having instructed us by the way that as he conceives there are several considerations in respect of which or some of which Baptism is called the Baptism of Repentance for the redemption of sins he undertakes the asserting of this conclusion that all these considerations are better answered in that said administration of Baptism which is made to men and women Beleevers then in that which is made to infants By the way whereas he here speaks somewhat masculinely though in a female phrase viz. that as he conceives there ARE several considerations in respâ—ct of which c. when he comes to deliver out these Considerations in particular he bewraies more effeminatenesse and delivers none of them positively but under the protection of this particle If If saith he If If and If and If. 1. He begins If it shall be conceived that it is therefore called the Baptism of Repentance for the Remission of sins because such who are at any time duly baptized do take up the Ordinance out of a Principle of Repentance upon which they look for remission of sins according to the promise of God in that behalf which if it be the saying contains a metonymie of the cause for the effect a Where or in what word or phrase of the saying he speakes of his metonymie of the cause for the effect resideth verily I understand not a thing not unusuall in Scripture yet this denomination and use of it is better serv'd in Mens baptism then in Childrens because Children have no such principle to act in them as Repentance is c. I have much adoe to make any competent sence of this period but as farre as I apprehend I answer Sect. 60. 1. Delivering himself onely thus IF it shall be conceived that therefore it is called c. doth he not encourage and teach others to doubt with himself whether Baptism be called the Baptism of Repentance for the remission of sins in any such consideration as here he suggesteth Or himself onely being in suspence about the truth of the notion why doth he build castles in the aire or offer sacrifice to an unknown god undertaking to assigne us a reason of that which for ought he knoweth yea or pretendeth to know may be of the house and lineage of that which is not He acteth this part of vanity no fewer then five times over within the compasse of two pages viz. p. 15. 16. 2. That which he sacrificeth to his unknown God is a corrupt thing For they who are duly baptized do not alwaies take up that ordinance out of a principle of repentance Simon the Sorcerer being baptized by Philip was I suppose in Mr. A's judgement duly baptized yet it appears by his story that he took not up this Ordinance out of a principle of Repentance Or if Simon the Sorcerer were not duly baptized yet certainly the Lord Christ was But did he take up the Ordinance of Baptism out of a Principle of Repentance And if none be to be looked upon as duly baptized but only those who take up the Ordinance out of a Principle of Repentance both He and we have cause in abundance to demur and doubt whether the far greater part of those in this nation who have lately been dipped have been duly baptized or no Yea Mr. A. himself according to such a principle cannot upon any certainty of knowledge affirm any person to have been been duly baptized unlesse him haply self Nor indeed doth the regular and due administration of Baptism depend upon any principle of Repentance in the person to
be baptized It is a true saying of Musculus that Baptism is indeed the Laver of Regeneration but not so that only they who are actually regenerate ought to be sealed therewith but those also who are to be regenerated afterward a Baptismus est lavacrum regeneration is sed non ita ut regenerati tantum illo debeant obsignari verùm etiam regenerandi Mus in Mat. c. 22. And Calvin answering an objection against the Baptizing of Infants affirmeth that they are to be baptized in futuram poenitentiam fidem b Calv. Institut l. 6. c. 14. Sect. 20. 1. in order to that Repentance and Faith which afterwards should be found in them And herein their Doctrine is expresly consonant to the Scriptures I indeed saith John the Baptist to those who were at present a generation of vipers baptize you with water 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for or unto Repentance 1. to oblige or engage you the more effectually to Repent Mat. 3. 11. So v. 8. Bring forth therefore therefore 1. since you have now been baptized fruits worthy Repentance 3. When he saith upon which they look for remission of sins according to the promise of God in that behalf I do not well understand with what antecedent he intendeth a match for his Relative WHICH If he intends it barely nakedly with Repentance that which he saith nothing concerns the Interest of his cause If with this clause do take up the Ordinance of Baptism out of a Principle of Repentance so that his meaning be that upon such a takeing up of the Ordinance as this viz. out of a principle of Repentance persons look for the remission of sins according c. Sect. 61. 1. Remission of sins is promised by God unto Repentance whether it be accompanied with Baptism or no Act. 3. 19. Act. 5. 31. Luk 24. 47. Prov. 28. 13. And consequently he that truly repenteth may look for remission of sins according to the promise of God in that behalf whether he taketh up the Ordinance of Baptism or no. Yea according to Mr. A's own principles no person ought to be baptized untill he believeth and what is believing being interpreted lesse then a looking for remission of sins upon Repentance according to the promise of God in that behalf If so then men may nay must or ought to look for remission of sins upon Repentance according c. before the taking up of the Ordinance he speaks of and consequently without it 2. In the Scriptures I finde neither precept for nor example of any looking for remission of sins by any man simply upon his taking up the Ordinance of Baptism no though taken up by him out of a principle of Repentance 4. What he meaneth by his Denomination and use of Baptism better served in mens baptism then in childrens I am again to seek If by this better service he means any thing meet for the understandings of men I know no reason why the Denomination and use of Baptism he speaks of should be either better or so well serv'd in the Baptism of men as of children considering that God himself judged the like Denomination and use of circumcision better serv'd in the circumcision of children then of men Otherwise I suppose he would have ordained by Law the circumcising of men rather then of children And whereas the Apostle declares the use of circumcision by this Denomination a sign and seale of the righteousness of Faith Rom. 4. 11. is not the Denomination of it and consequently the use of it the same in substance both with the Denomination and use of Baptism For what is Repentance but Faith in implication as Faith also comprehends Repentance in it the Scriptures accordingly by reason of this mutual 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 making the same promises indifferently unto the one and the other Again what is Remission of sins but the righteousness of Faith Or what is the Righteousness of Faith but in strictest proprietie of speech remission of sins As for that new-fangled conceit that Circumcision was a sign and seal of the righteousness of Faith only unto Abraham personally considered it is so ridiculously importune that an operous and solemne confutation of it would be little other it self Certainly God did not injoyne two kinds of circumcision the one specifically differing in the signification and end of it from the other one to signifie and seale both covenants as well that which was temporall or carnall as that which was spirituall another to signifie that covenant only which was spirituall Besides if circumcision had signified and sealed nothing to the Jewish nation but only the covenant of God to give them the land of the earthly Canaan why should God covenant with them long after Abraham was dead that he would circumcise their heart and the heart of their seed to love the Lord their God with all their heart and with all their soul that they might live Deut. 30. 6. Doubtlesse these things import much more in circūcision then either the signifying or sealing of an earthly covenant unto those to whom it was given This appears from many other passages of Scripture which may be considered at leasure Rom. 2. 28 29. Philip. 3. 3. Col. 2. 11. Act. 7. 51. besides other As for the great argument in defence of the wild conceit now opposed built upon Rom. 4. 11. it is built quite besides the clear meaning and import of the place For because here it is said that He Abraham received the sign of circumcision a seale of the righteousness of the Faith which he had yet being uncircumcised THAT HE MIGHT BE THE FATHER OF ALL THEM THAT BELIEVE though they be not circumcised that righteousness might be imputed unto them also Mr. Fisher a See Mr. Fisher Baby-Baptism p. 18. 19 24 154 269. and Mr. A. would infer from these words that he might be the Father of all them that believe that Abraham received circumcision viz. in his flesh as a seale of the righteousnesse of Faith for this end that by receiving it upon this account or upon these terms viz. as a seale of the righteousness of Faith he might hereby be made or become the Father of all that believe c. Which honour they weakly imagine could not accrue unto him by his receiving of circumcision if any other of his posterity should receive it upon the same terms with him I mean as a seale of the righteousnesse of Faith This is the strength or weaknesse rather of their arguing from this place that Circumcision was a seale of the righteousnesse of Faith unto Abraham only For 1. Though Abraham did receive the sign of Circumcision in his flesh Gen. 17. 24 26. yet is it not this receiving it which is here spoken of but his receiving it in the Law or Ordinance of it from God in such a sence as John the Baptist may be said to have received Baptism viz. because he was the first to whom the Ordinance of
goodnesse of it have been sufficiently vindicated in the premises As the Apostle in the case of marriage affirming that he that keepeth his virgin meaning unmarried doth BETTER granteth with all that he that giveth her in marriage doth WELL 1 Cor. 7. 36 38. So he that teacheth that any End of Baptism is BETTER answered one way undeniably granteth that this End may WELL and to a commendable degree be answered in another Sect. 67. 3. Whereas he supposeth that Baptism may be called the Baptism of Repentance for the remission of sins because God thereby signifies and SEALS the remission of sins upon Repentance c. he takes the boldnesse to lift up his pen against the great Apostle of his Faith in the doctrine of Antipedo-baptism Mr. Sam. Fisher whose avowed Doctrine it is that Baptism as it is not so much as signifying unto children a so is it no SEALING Ordinance Baby-Baptsm p. 154 c. unto any In which notion of his he laies the honour of the Ordinance of Baptism in the dust unto which notwithstanding otherwise he crieth Hosanna in the highest 4. Whereas he gives this for a reason why the End and Vse of Baptism of which he speaketh should be better answered by the baptizing of men then of children viz. Because men who have begun to repent are in a good capacitie to receive confirmation and establishment in their hope and confidence whereas Infants whilest such are uncapable of any such thing c. I answer 1. That which himself here onely doubtfully and with proviso call's one End and Use of Baptism viz. the signifying and sealing unto men the remission of their sins upon repentance one greater then He in the cause of Ana-Baptism as we lately heard denies to be either the one or the other Himself being doubtfull whether there be any such End or Use of Baptism as that here mentioned by him upon what sober account doth he trouble the world with telling them that in case there be such either End or Vse they are better answered by the baptism of men then of children Is that which may not be as well as be better answered by one means then another These are strange speculations 2. Supposing that one End and Vse of Baptism should be better answered by the baptizing of men then of children what follows from hence It neither follows in the first place that therefore every end and use thereof is better answered by such an administration nor in the second that Baptism therefore is not to be administred unto children One end of meats and drinks as for example the preservation of the health and strength of men and women come to their just statures and growth is better answered by the eating and drinking of men and women then of children but it followeth not from hence that therefore eating drinking are not to be allowed unto children One end and use of marriage is better answered by the marrying of persons in the strength and vigour of their youth but this proveth not that therefore it is unlawful for persons of more maturitie of years to marrie This very End and Use of Baptism here suggested was better answered by the Baptism of men who had sinned and repented then by the baptism of Christ himself who was uncapable of repentance and of remission of sins hereby yet this proveth not that therefore the baptism of Christ was unlawfull Therefore Mr. A's reasoning at this turn is to little purpose Sect. 68. 3. Whereas he attempteth to prove that the End and Use of Baptism now under consideration is better answered by the baptism of men then of children by this argument viz. because men WHO HAVE BEGUN TO REPENT are in a good capacitie to receive c. doth he not reason at as loose a tate as he that should go about to prove that men shall be saved because righteous men shall be saved or should infer that such and such things do belong to a subject simply considered because they belong to this subject so and so qualified 4. Though Abraham when he was circumcised was in a good capacity to receive confirmation and establishment in his hope and confidence both that God would give unto him in his posteritie the promised land of Canaan and likewise that he would justifie him thorow his beleeving whereas Isaac at the time of his circumcising was in no such capacitie of either yet was the circumcising of Isaac every whit as regular and lawfull as the circumcising of Abraham yea was of the two more agreeable to the standing Law for Circumcision In like manner though children be in no such capacity at the time of their baptizing to receive confirmation and establishment in their hope and confidence of obtaining remission of sins upon their repentance as repentant men are when they are baptized yet may their baptism be every whit as lawfull yea and more regular then the baptizing of such men Therefore Mr. A's discourse in the quarters we are now beating up is without sinews Sect. 69. 5. And lastly for this when he saith whereas Infants whilest such are ALTOGETHER uncapable of of any such thing in respect whereof this end is made frustrate when Baptism is given unto them he speaketh truth neither in the premises nor in the conclusion For 1. Infants whilst such are not ALTOGETHER uncapable of that whereof he speaketh For although as hath been formerly argued they be not in an actuall capacity of the thing I mean in such a capacity whereby they are inabled to receive the Confirmation and establishment he speaks of at the time of their baptizing or whilst thy are infants yet are they in some capacitie and this proper and direct though mediate and remote of receiving these accommodations in due time as they are in such a capacitie as soon as born of speaking thinking apprehending c. however this capacity is not ordinarily reduced into act till after severall years Secondly from hence it follows that neither is that End of Baptism of which he speaks made frustrate when Baptism is given unto children any whit more then the End of planting is made frustrate by the non-fructification of the tree planted immediately upon the planting of it or the end of sowing made frustrate by reason that the seed doth not yield an harvest-increase as soon as it is sown What I do thou knowest not now said the Lord Christ unto Peter and in him to the rest but thou shalt know hereafter Joh. 13. 7. Christs action here spoken of was not hereby made frustrate unto Peter because he understood not the meaning or import of it when it was acted And many of his sayings to his Disciples which they understood not when they were spoken were understood by them with advantage afterwards See Sect. 152. Sect. 70. Whereas he addeth that there is a greater APPEARANCE both of the wisdom and goodness of God in vouchsafing and applying such a means as Baptism is to
strengthen mens Faith in his promise of Remission of sins upon their repentance unto such who 1. have need of this Confirmation and 2. are capable of receiving it then there is in that application of it which is made unto Infants who neither have need of it not yet are capable of receiving it I answer 1. What appearance there may be of the wisdom and goodness of God in such a disposition as he speaks of in his own eyes or in the eyes of men of his judgement I shall not prejudge but certain I am that there neither is nor hath been any such appearance in the eyes of many men as sharp-sighted in matters of this nature as they 2. Nor doth it argue either greater wisdom or goodnesse to withhold from a man such supplies which he may have urgent occasion to make use of untill the very pang of his necessity in this kind cometh upon him then it doth to prevent him with such accommodations against the time of his need Suppose that Circumcision was a sign and seal only of the faithfulnesse of God in his promise of giving the land of Canaan unto the Jews yet did there appear as much wisdom and goodness of God in vouchsafing and applying this means of their confirmation herein unto them whilst they were yet children and so at present uncapable of receiving it as there would or could have done in vouchsafing and applying the same means unto them afterwards when they were both more capable of the said confirmation and withall stood in more need of it Sect. 71. 3. And lastly for this Though children have no present need of that Confirmation he speaks of yet have they even present need of the application of such an Ordinance unto them by means whereof they may receive this Confirmation with advantage in due time As the children of the Jews had need at least some kind of need unlesse we shall say that Circumcision was altogether superfluous unto them of such an Ordinance to be administred unto them by which they might be confirmed afterwards in the truth and faithfulnesse of God for the performance of that promise whatever it was which was signed and sealed unto them by circumcision although they were uncapable of any such confirmation as this at the time when they were circumcised in like manner children under the Gospell though whilst children they stand in no need of confirmation in the truth of the Covenant of Grace yea and are all this while uncapable of it yet this is no argument to prove that therefore they do not stand in need of being prevented with such an Ordinance from God by which they may be confirmed herein when they shall arrive at a capacitie of this confirmation Mariners or such who traffique by Sea whilst they are yet on shore in their own land or whilst they are sailing upon the seas may stand in need of many things of which notwithstanding they have no use or benefit untill they come to another land whether their course is intended And though the same things may possibly be procured and had in this other land whether their voyage is bent yet if they cannot be had here upon terms equally beneficiall with those on which they may be had in their own land the men we speak of may truly and properly enough be said to stand in need of them before they go to sea and whilst they are yet in their own land In like manner though children have no actuall or present benefit by Baptism nor are capable of any until years of discretion knowledg yea though they may be baptized when they come to be men as well as whilst they are yet children yet neither of these considerations nor both together argue any thing but that baptism may be needfull for children and that whilst such they receive it upon terms of better advantage for their future occasions then they could do in case they should not receive it untill they come to be men But the truth is that Mr. A. in all these reasonings on which He insists in his second argument against infant-Infant-baptism seems to strive to out-wisdom God and all they who rise up against the same practise with arguments pretending inconvenience unprofitablenesse or the like therein dash their foot against the same stone Sect. 72. 4. We have yet p. 16. another possible reason proposed to us why it may be called the Baptism of Repentance for remission of sins viz. this Because the persons who are baptized do thereby professe and DECLARE VNTO THE WORLD that they look for remission of sins from God upon their repentance If saith he it be called c yet this end also is better answered in mens Baptism then in infants I answer as formerly 1. But what if this be no reason of that Denomination of Baptism of which we have heard so much to so little purpose what then becomes of that which Mr. A. builds upon it The air may be afraid of being beaten by it That the five reasons here suggested by him should all of them be reasons in realitie and truth of the said Denomination is I suppose scarce his own thought or notion nor are they all well consistent amongst themselves as was formerly hinted nor hath he declared his mind which of the five one or more should inherit 2. The reason or end of the said Denomination here waveringly and upon supposall suggested by him is probably no true reason or end thereof For how can persons baptized upon the terms allowed by him and frequently practised in his way thereby professe and DECLARE UNTO THE WORLD that they look for remission of sins upon their repentance when as 1. many are baptized in hugger-mugger privatly and in the night and of whose baptism its self the world possibly may have no knowledge whilst they live Yea I know and Mr. A. knows a person not inconsiderable in the Common-wealth of new-baptism who kept his Baptism to himself for a eleven or twelve years together before the world yea or his fellow-dippers themselves one or two haply present at the solemnitie excepted knew any thing thereof Doubtlesse all this while he made no profession or declaration unto the world of any thing at all by his baptism 2. In case the persons baptized should make proclamation in the streets or market-places that they are baptized the world is at liberty whether they will believe them or no. If saith Christ Joh. 5. 31. I bear witnesse of my self my witnesse is not true meaning legally true or such which you being strangers to me are necessitated to own And it is no easie matter for the world to receive testimony of any mans baptism in Mr. A's way of baptizing from two or three witnesses present at it 3. And lastly in case the world might be satisfied touching the truth and certaintie of the baptism of all that are baptized yet do they not understand any such profession or declaration imported or
their respective articles by some solemn act of theirs in presence of witnesses as by signing sealing delivering c. So God in the Covenant between him and men will have something like unto this done by men PVBLIQUELY to signifie their consent to the terms of it as well as what is done by him to declare his readiness to do and perform what he hath undertaken on his part We are yet in a safe roade or however not much beside it Only a touch upon two things 1. If by PVBLIQVELY he means in the sight of the world or upon such terms that all men or the generality of persons round about may readily come to know and understand then his rule condems his practise and the practise generally observed by persons of his judgement For neither did himself in this sence publiquely signifie his coÌ„sâ—nt to the terms of the covenant by his being baptized the generalitie of us knowing nothing of his Baptism but only by tradition whose information in other cases is not very authentique or authoritative or by common fame which is known to be Tà m ficti pravique tenax quà m nuncia veri i. As well an hâ—ld-fast of â—hat feigned is As a Reporter of Truth 's certainties And as hath been notic'd formerly that most of those who are led as they think to Christ by the way of new Baptism chuse Nicodemus his season either formally or materially for their voyage Therefore what they do in this kind they do it not so PVBLIQUELY 2. The will of God in the Covenant made with Abraham his posteritie whether spiritual or teÌ„poral was as much that something should be done by meÌ„ publiquely to signifie their consent unto the terms of it as it is that any thing in this kind should be done by men to signifie their consent to the terms of the Covenant of Grace in the Gospel Therefore how impertinent is that which follows Now faith in Christ and an obedientiall subjection to ALL his Laws and precepts being the condition of this Covenant on mans part at WHAT TIME SOEVER HE ENTERS INTO COVENANT with God and undertakes the performance of the condition he is to sign and seal the same IN THE PRESENCE of wâ—nesses by that solemn ACT OF HIS in being baptized For answer Sect. 76. 1. I had thought untill now and shall think so still notwithstanding Mr. A's thought to the contrary that a person in his being baptized is a patient or sufferer only not an Agent or Actour much lesse that he performs any Solemn Act herein For they who act in their being baptized must needs be Se-baptists and not baptized after the manner of the Gospell So that his notion about mens signifying their consent to the terms of the Gospell by some solemn ACT falls to the ground If he pleads that men act in offering or submitting themselves unto Baptism though not in their Baptism it self I answer Be it so yet mens offering or submitting themselves unto Baptism are no solemn or Sacramental actings nor can their consent to the terms of the Covenant be said to be signified by these actings unlesse it may be said withall that men may testifie that consent we speak of without being baptized For that men may offer themselves and submit unto Baptism without being actually baptized is I suppose no mans question 2. Whereas he makes an obedientiall subjection to ALL Christs laws and precepts without any explication or proviso as well as Faith in Christ the condition of the Covenant of Grace on mans part doth he not make a Law by which were it of any force or authoritie as well himself as all other men should be condemned unlesse he can approve himself an exception from that Generall Rule of the Apostle James In many things we offend all If no person can claim interest in the good things of the Covenant but only they who shall perform the condition of this Covenant and this condition be either in whole or in part an obedienâ—iall subjection to all Christs laws and precepts as Mr. A. determines then in case he doth not obedientially subâ—ect to all these laws and precepts which I am farre from thinking that either he or any other person doth yea or that they do so much as know what all these Laws and Precepts are he hath fast shut the doore of life against himself 3. Whereas he saith at what time soever a person entereth into covenant with God he is to sign and seal the same in the presence of witnesses by the solemn act of his being baptized 1. I would demand of him whether he thinks the Lord Christ was not enâ—ered into covenant with God before his being baptized or whether he acted besides rule that at the time of his entering into covenant with God he did not sign and seal the same by his being baptized Yea I cannot but think that the Eunuch was entered into covenant with God some considerable space of time before his being baptized Nor is it an extravagant thought to conceive the same of Cornelius 2. Nor is he able to prove nor is the thing much more probable then proveable any presence of witnesses either at the Baptizing of the Eunuch or of Paul besides many others lastly I would gladly learn of him whether the children of the Jews entered into covenant with God at the time of their circumcising or not till afterwards when they were able to make profession of their Faith in God If he teacheth me the former for truth then would I gladly learn this lesson further why the children at least the children of beleevers under the Gospell should not be as capable of entering into Covenant with God as they and if so why they should not be baptized according to his own principles If the latter then what necessitie was there consequently now is there that at what time soever a person entereth into Covenant with God he should sign and seal the same Sect. 77. Of his further conceptions about the businesse he delivers himself thus p. 17. In this respect especially I CONceive it is that Baptism is called the Baptism of Repentance for the remission of sins Mark 1. 4. Luk. 3. 3. because men are to take up that Ordinance upon their first beginning to repent in order to the remission of their sins For like reason I SVPPOSE it is called the washing of regeneration Tit. 3. 5. because men upon ther being born again are to be baptized according to what was practized in the Apostles times Hence it is likewise as MAY WELL BE CONCEIVED that mens being born of water and of the Spirit John 3. 5. the washing of Regeneration and renewing of the Holy Ghost Tit. 3. 5. are joyned together not because the Spirit works regeneration in and by Baptism if we respect the beginning of it c. The day will fail us to gather up by animadversion what Mr. A. hath scattered here by inadvertencie and inconsideratnesse For 1.
After five severall accompts lately given in by him as we have heard with the Imprimis of an IF in every of them respectively why Baptism should be called The Baptism of repentance for the forgivenesse of sins now as IF he had but dallied and plaid fast and loose with us in these he delivereth us in a sixth accompt of the truth whereof he seems to be more confident then of any then of all the former and yet we have this also tendered unto us somewhat tenderly though with an especially viz. with an I conceive In this respect especially I CONCEIVE it is that c. But 2. Doth not his Comparative term especially relating to all his five former accounts suppose that all these had done vertuously though this last surpasseth them all And yet are not some of them at least one of them if not more altogether inconsistent with this The tenor of this sixt and highest-priz'd accompt being this because men are to take up the Ordinance upon their first beginning to repent in order to the remission of their sins renders it very hardly consistent with that before delivered in the third place which as we heard was this because God thereby signifies and seals unto men the remission of their sins upon their repentance If Baptism be therefore called the Baptism of repentance for the remission of sins because men are to take it up in order to the remission of their sins God cannot thereby either signifie or seal unto men the remission of their sins upon their repentance The reason of the inconsistencie is plain If God seals unto men the forgivenesse of their sins upon their repentance Baptism cannot be taken up I mean regularly according to the mind of God in order hereunto because Baptism is not to be taken up according to Mr. A's own principles but after repentance and consequently after remission of sins if this be given by God upon repentance If the remission of sins precedes Baptism which it must needs do if it be given upon repentance then ought not Baptism to be taken up in order thereunto Or if it be taken up by any person in order hereunto the intention represents the action hatefull and abominable in the sight of God Therefore another IF would better have become this sixt accompt also then an ESPECIALLY How ill consistent it is with some other of his former accounts I judge it beneath the Readers edification to examine But Sect. 78. 3. How lamely doth he plead the cause of his beloved Conceit that Baptism should especially be therefore called the Baptism ef repentance for c. because men are to take it up upon their first beginning to repent IN ORDER TO THE REMISSION OF SINS For like reason saith he I suppose it is called the washing of Regeneration Tit. 3. 5. because men upon c. So again Hence it is likewise as may well be conceived but much better not conceived nor once thought that mens being born of water and of the Spirit c. What can a man reasonably imagine that he should see or notion in any one of or in all these passages to countenance his notion that Baptism shoud be taken up in order to Remission of sins The clause which in face would best have befriended him at this turn he suppresseth notwithstanding it was at his pens end For having cited these words Act. 22. 16. And now why tarriest thou arise and be baptized immediately followeth And wash away thy sins Why being to act the part he had now in hand he should keep these words behind the Curtain is a secret that I know not how to enter All that can with any face or colour of reason be proved from the scripture passages as yet produced is nothing but what will be granted unto him without proof viz. that Baptism by persons adult and beleeving and not formerly baptized ought to be taken up upon the first opportunity after their beleeving But this Mr. A's principles considered according to which he was not baptized till many years after his beleeving putteth him to rebuke but concerneth not us who judg our selves to have been baptized in our Infancie But for the countenancing of the darling notion mentioned it is like we shall hear somewhat to more purpose ere long Mean while 4. It may not be amisse to observe by the way how full of stonds Mr. A's faith is or at least seems to be about the particulars argued in that part of his discourse which is under present consideration and how lightly he treads the ground on which he is now walking First he only conceives it is as he saith In this respect especially I CONCEIVE it is c. Next he supposeth it is For like reason I SUPPOSE it is c. Thirdly he tells us that it may well be conceived that it is Hence it is likewise as may WELL BE CONCEIVED c. Lastly his doubtless it was though according to the grammaticall import of the particle doubtless it seems to imply confidence yet according to the more passable sence of this word in ordinarie construction it notes some degree of hesitance or question-making I do not make this observation as blaming in the least Mr. A's modestie or dubitative manner of expressing himself in things questionable and obscure Only herein I judge him to be in no better case then Peter was when Paul said of him that he was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be condemned Gal. 2. 11. viz. that he should trouble the world rend and teare Châ—istan societies upon the account of such â—otions or apprehensions of the truth whereof himself hath no better assurance then conceit or dubitation 5. And lastly His respective sences and expositions of Joh. â— 5. born of water and of the spirit and so of Tit. 2. 5. the washing of regeneration are so much his that our best Expositours do not own them nor do either the words themselves nor yet the scope of the Context in either place require them Concerning the former of these places Calvin expresly professeth that he can at no hand be perswaded that Christ speaketh here of Baptism adding that it had not been seasonable for him so to do a Quantumveâ—ò an hunc locum attinet nullo modo adducor ut Christum de Bâ—ptismo verba facere credam hoc enim fuisset intempestivum Calv in Joh. 3. 5. And not long after this The water saith he of which Christ here speaks is nothing else but the inward purgation and vegetation of the holy Ghost subjoyning this rule for the confirmation of his exposition that it is noâ— unusuall that the copulaâ—ive particle should be taken Exegetically when the latter member is an explication of the former b Ergo nihil est aliud quam interior Spiritus sancti purgatio ac vegetatio Ibid. a Adde quòd non est insolens copulam exegetioâ— sumi quum scilicet posterius membrum est explicatio priâ—ris Ibid Mr.
sins which is attainable by Faith in the bloud of Christ may be obtained without Baptism 3. If Baptism be required on mans part to interesse him in remission of sins and sanctification of the spirit then hath God suspended both the justification and sanctification of men and consequently their eternall Salvation upon a ceremonie or carnall Ordinance as Baptism by some of the most learned of Mr. A's partie as we formerly heard is acknowledged to be as well or as much as he hath done upon Faith or Repentance themselves and thus men shall be perfected by the flesh as the Apostle speaketh Yea 4. If a Declaration of Repentance by Baptism be required on mans part to interesse him in remission of sins or in Sanctification of the Spirit then is a Declaration hereof by Baptism or by submitting to an outward and fleshly ceremonie more accepted with God then a Declaration made by mortification innocencie holinesse of conversation c. The reason of this consequence is plain viz. because a Declaration of a mans Repentance by these or any of them is not required by God nor yet accepted by him upon any such account as to interesse him in remission of sins or to translate him from an estate of sin and death into a state of justification no nor yet to intitle him to the sanctification of the Spirit For he that is not a justified person before any Declaration be made by him of his repentance by such fruits or expressions of it as these will never be justified afterwards Nor can any maÌ„ bring forth any such fruits of Repentance as these unless he be interessed in the sanctification of the Spirit before hand Therefore Baptism is not required on mans part nor yet a Declartion of his repentance by Baptism to interesse him either in Remission of sinâ— or sanctification of the Spirit Sect. 81. 5. If it were so then only children of wrath and persons not yet reconciled unto God should be the regular and lawfull subjects of Baptism For if Baptism be required on mans part to interesse them in Remission of sins all they who are yet unbaptized must needs be under the guilt of their sins and so liable to eternall condemnation for them And if the case be thus Faith and repentance are but dead works untill Baptism quickens them and raiseth them up from the dead 6. If Mr. A's Position now protested were Orthodox and sound John the Baptist was in his bloud I mean in the guilt and pollution of his sins when he entered upon the work and ministerie of baptizing with water yea and for ought appears to the contrary so lived and died and consequently perished eternally for it no where appears that ever he was baptized and if he were not baptized by the verdict of Mr. A's Doctrine he could have neither part nor fellowship in the blessed businesse of Remission of sinnes and so must perish 7. If both Repentance and the Declaration of it by Baptism be required on mans part to interesse him in remission of sins and Sanctification of the Spirit then according to Mr. A's judgement and notion about the truth and requisit terms of the administration of Baptism either all or far the greatest part of the antient Fathers of the Christian Church with the generalitie of Christians in their dayes all or far the greatest part of the worthy Martyrs both in latter and in former times all or far the greatest part of our late Protestant Divines whose zeal learning labour and faithfulnesse God was pleased to use about the Reformation and for the Restauration propagation of the truth of Christian Religion as Luther Calvin Musculus Bucer P. Martyr Zuinglius c. together with our own worthies Perkins Dod Hildersham Preston Sibs c. together with the generalitie of the people taught and instructed by them against all these I say we must write bitter things and conclude that whilst they liv'd they were in the gall of bitternesse and bands of iniquity and that they died and consequently perished in their sins For most certain it is that these were not baptized as Mr. A. and men of his judgement count and call Baptism and consequently could not make any Declaration of their repentance by Baptism And if so they must all to hell unlesse Mr. A's Doctrine be content to be sent thither in their stead Sect. 82. 8. If no person can make a Declaration of their Repentance by Baptism then cannot a Declaration in this kind or that which M. A. calls a Declaration interesse any man in remission of sins The reason of the consequence in this Proposition is evident That which is not cannot act nor can any such thing or Act interest any man inâ—â—remission of sinnes which may be as well found in those whose sins are not remitted as in those whose are Now that persons who are baptized may be in the gall of bitternesse and bands of iniquitie and consequently not have their sins remitted their Baptism notwithstanding is apparent in the case of Simon Mâ—gus to whom soon after his baptizing Peter said Thou hast neither part nor lot in this matter for thine heart is not right in the sight of God For I perceive that thou art in the gall of bitternesse and bands of iniquity Act. 8. 21 23. Nor is the Baptism of a very great part of those who have been of late baptized and this as Mr. A. calls Baptism amongst us any Declaration of their repentance at least not of any such repentance which hath any thing to do with remission of sinnes their unworthy wayes and actions proclaiming them aloud to be persons void as well of the knowledge as fear of God 9. The Grandees themselves of Mr. A's partie yea and I presume himself also with them beleeve and hold that amongst the Heathen unto whom the Name of Jesus Christ was never brought nor the Gospel ever preached orally or by the mouths of men and consequently who were never Baptized there are or may be found persons interessed in Remission of sins If so with what truth can Mr. A. affirm yea rather with what face can he avouch with a most unchristiaÌ„ censure of all those who shall denie it that both Repentance and a Declaration of it by Baptism are required on mans part to interesse him in Remission of sins Sect. 83. 10. In case as well a Declaration of Repentance by Baptism as repentance it self be required on mans part to interesse him in remission of sins would the Apostle Paul have thanked God he baptized none of the Corinthians but Crispus and Gaius i. that he interessed none of them in remission of sins but these 1 Cor. 1. 14 Or should he have had cause so farre to underrate the office and worth of baptizing beneath the preaching of the Gospell as to say that Christ sent him not to Baptize but to preach the Gospel i. not to do all that which might interesse men compleatly in remission of sins
be any mans thought or imagination that Christ would not have so much as once mentioned it in neither of those solemn Commissions which he gave at severall times for the preaching of the Gospell Or was that ministerie of the Gospell which was by the Lord Christ himself committed unto men without any order or direction to baptize ineffectuall effectually to convert those unto God who should beleeve and receive it and so to save them Nor can it with any colour of reason or proof be pretended that those at least all those who were now sent forth to preach the Gospell had received a commission to baptize before the scripture no where affirming it no nor so much as overturing it of them all Nor can it upon any whit a better account be said that in the commission which Christ gave them to preach the Gospell he vertually or consequentially included a cōmission also for them to baptize For 1. this is pretended at a single peradventure neither the Scripture nor any competent reason persuading it 2. When Christ gave a cōmission for such a preaching of the Gospel which he intended should be accompanied with a power to baptize he maketh particular and expresse mention of baptizing as well as of preaching Mat. 28. 19. 3. And lastly Neither do we read of so much as any one person baptized either by the Apostles themselves or by the seventie by vertue of that mission or commission from Christ to preach the Gospel of which we now speak 18. And lastly doth not himself p. 16. of his present discourse affirm and teach that Baptism may therefore be called the Baptism of repentance for the remission of sins because God THEREBY SIGNIFIES AND SEALS unto men the remission of their sins UPON THEIR REPENTANCE If God by Baptism signifies and seals unto men the remission of their sins upon their repentance then certainly men are interessed in remission of sins upon and by means of their Repentance and so before Baptism be taken up by them otherwise God should seal unto men an untruth and that which is not Again doth he not a little after in the same page suppose that Baptism may be called the Baptism of repentance because the persons who are baptized do thereby professe and declare unto the world that they look for REMISSION OF SINS FROM GOD UPON THEIR REPENTANCE And yet again that it may be called the Baptism of repentance c. because it seals and confirms the covenant or promises of God made to men touching the remission of their sins upon their repentance If it be the covenant or promise of God to give unto men the remission of sins upon their repentance certainly repentance it self by vertue of this covenant of God interesseth mē in remission of sins without the interposure of Baptism or without any contribution from Baptism thereunto Sect. 86. But if a Declaration of a mans Repentance by Baptism be nor requisite to interesse him in remission of sins as well as repentance it self what answer is to be given to those two texts of Scripture which Mr. A. useth I will not say abuseth to prove the same especially to the latter Act. 2. 38 39. Wherein if he speaks truth that Doctrine of his is too evidently asserted to be denied by any but those that will not see The former of the two is that known place Mar. 16. 16. He that beleeveth and is baptized shall be saved Here saith he Beleeving and being baptized are conjoyned as relative to Salvation In which saying he seemeth to imply that Baptism in the letter and properly so called is as necessary to salvation as beleeving it self For if he will endure to be understood to speak of Baptism metonymically or synechdochically taken i. for an outward profession of Faith or beleeving which is our Saviours sence of the word baptized in the Scripture before us as we shall shew presently that which he saith is nothing to his purpose And though Baptism properly so called both in the Institution or precept of it as likewise in a regular subjection unto it or reception of it must needs be conceived to relate in one kind or degree or other unto salvation as all the Commandments of God and the creatures obedience unto every of them do and as Circumcision it self by the Apostles own acknowledgment sometimes did yet 1. It is not necessary that it should relate in one kind or other much lesse with the same kind of relation wherewith Believing relateth unto that Justification which consisteth in remission of sins or consequently that it should interesse men in this Justification For many things relate and conduce and this by way of necessitie unto salvation which are no wayes necessarie to invest a man in an estate of justification 2. Neither is it necessarie that baptizing should be relative to salvation it self upon the same terms with beleeving For Sect. 87. 1. Beleeving in persons capable is universally and indispensably in all cases whatsoever necessarie thereunto as the clause and words immediatly following those under present consideration do with the whole current of the Scriptures besides import But he that believeth not shall be damned But Baptizing though it be granted to be in ordinarie cases simply necessarie thereunto yet in the case lately mentioned and possibly in many others viz. when he that truly beleeveth is not s 〈…〉 ed in his judgment and conscience touching the regular capacitie of such persons who are willing to undertake the work to baptize Nor can I believe that in case the Eunuch baptized by Philip had after his beleeving Jesus Christ to be the son of God been prevented by death before he had come to the water wherewith he was baptized he should have perished eternally for want of it And this questionlesse if we understand our Saviour to speak in the place in hand of Baptism literally and without a figure is the reason why having in the former part of the verse included Baptism together with beleeving condition-wise in his promise of Salvation thus He that beleeveth and is baptized shall be saved yet leaveth it out in his opposite threatning of condemnation denouncing this not against persons who shall not be baptized but only against such who shall not believe But he that believeth not shall be damned Baptism in conjunction with Faith may be available or contributarie towards salvation and yet the want of it not necessarily exclusive of Salvation When Solomon saith wisdom is good with an inheritance he doth not imply or suppose that it is evill or not good without an inheritance So when the Apostle saith it is good for a man not to touch a woman meaning not to marrie he doth not suppose that it is evill or inconvenient for him at least in all cases to marrie He that promiseth salvation unto a meaner qualification in conjunction with a greater doth not hereby threaten this greater qualification with the losse of salvation for the want of the
company of the lesser especially if in stead of this it be accompanied with another much better and greater and of higher acceptation with God then it But 2. Suppose Baptism were every wayes and in every respect as necessarie to salvation as beleeving which yet is notoriously untrue as we have proved yet will it not follow that Baptism in such or such a particular mode or Externall manner of administration should be thus necessary For certain it is that the Lord Jesus Christ hath not suspended the eternall salvation of his creature especially not of those who truly believe in him upon any modalitie or formalitie of acting not particularly and precisely determined and injoyned by himself but only coÌ„jecturally obtruded upon theÌ„ by men For what if any one man â—r any ten men should please themselves never so highly be never so confident of the authentiquenesse or legitimacie of their inferences and deductions in one kind or other from the Scriptures will their confidence in this kind amount to an infallibilitie yea or to any competent proof that either the belief or practise of what they upon such terms deduce and inferre from the Scripture is essentially necessarie unto salvation Or hath the Lord Christ any where in the Scriptures determinately enjoyned or prescribed the particular mode of dipping as essentiall unto Baptism or to the regular administration thereof Therefore however Baptism in this form cannot with any tolerable face of reason be pretended as essentially requisite unto salvation as beleeving Sect. 88. 3. Neither can Mr. A. with all his fellow-dogmatists substantially prove that the Baptizing here spoken of is to be understood of a Baptizing with water considering that there is another kind of Baptism which the Scripture from place to place makes by many degrees more necessary unto salvation then a baptizing with water This is the Baptisme of affliction or sufferings for righteousnesse sake See for this Mat. 20. 22. compared with Mar. 10. 38. Luk. 12. 50. Rom. 6. 8. 2 Tim. 2. 11 12. Mar. 8. 34 35 c. Act. 14. 22. besides many other places Besides the grounds and arguments of those who judge water-baptism at least as to the necessitie of it to have expired with the Ministerie of John the Baptist or at farthest with the destruction of the temple of Jerusalem and the dissolution of the Jewish Church have not been yet sufficiently answered not yet balanced by any arguments or grounds for Mr. A's opinion and practise extant that I know of in the world Which grounds and arguments I mean for the non-necessitie of water Baptism although I do not yet apprehend them so demonstrative as to overrule my judgement that way yet I judge them nothing so easie of solution as those which have served in the warfare of Re-baptizing hitherto 4. Suppose we the place to be understood of water-Baptism and that some kind of a necessitie hereof unto salvation is here likewise insinuated by our Saviour yet can it not upon any tolerable account be understood of the actuall or literall perception of Baptism as if this were necessary to Salvation But of an inward obedientiall frame of heart to submit unto Baptism when opportunity serveth i. when there is a conveniencie of water and a person who according to the light of a mans conscience is regularly capable of administring it and withall willing to perform the work The preparation of the heart for the performance of a duty when opportunitie serveth and requireth it as well as the performance it self is oft in Scripture injoyned in such terms or words which properly signifie the Act or performance it self See Luk. 14 33. Luk 12. 33. 2 Tim. 2. 3. Mat. 5. 25 44. For it is against the main current of the Scriptures and against the sence of all considering men that God should suspend the eternall salvation of any man especially of a true Beleever upon the will and pleasure of another man or upon the receiving of any thing especially any externall thing which may be withheld from him against his will or which possibly he may never meet with an opportunitie to receive Therefore however such a Baptism as Mr. A. and his have taken up and as he presseth from the Scripture in hand is not simply or universally but only in particularitie of case if this in any degree necessarie unto salvation But 5. And lastly the clear and unquestionable sence of the place is to understand the Baptism or Baptising here spoken of synecdochically a form of speech then which there is none more frequent or familiar in the Scriptures viz. for a profession of that Faith or beleevings which our Saviour speaks of Baptism especially in those times when and of which our Saviour now speaks being a known part or piece of this profession In this figure of speech to fall by the sword to die by the sword with the like signifies any kind of death by the hand of an enemie as well as that which is properly and literally executed by the sword the sword being an ordinarie or known weapon by which men are slain in war 2 Sam. 11. 25. Psal 44 3. This interpretation is every wayes consonant to a master-vein of texts in the body of the Gospell viz. all such which hold forth a publique and open owning or professing of the Name of Christ and of the Gospell as required of all Beleevers in order to their being saved See more particularly upon this account Rom. 10. 9 10. which two verses are a very plain and significant exposition of the clause in hand as also Mat. 10. 33 34. 2 Tim. 2. 12. Mar. 8. 38. to omit several others whereas Mr. A's sence of the place who understands it properly strictly and literally of water-baptism hath neither so much as any one text of Scripture nor any argument of weight to stand by it And how unreasonable is it to conceive or think that a true Faith in coniunction with a Christian and holy conversation on the one hand and with sufferings for righteousnesse and the Gospels sake on the other hand should not be as available for all ends and purposes with God especially for that great end Salvation as a like Faith only in conjunction with a single act of once going into water to be baptized All Protestant Expositors that I have had opportunity to consult upon the place agree in the Substance of the interpretation last asserted yea some of them parallel it with Rom. 10. 9 10. which passage as we lately hinted is a better commentary upon the clause in hand then we are like to receive from any person whatsoever in these dayes dissenting from it Sect. 89. The other Scripture which it seems hath been a snare upon Mr. A. not only to intangle him with this most dangerous Doctrine that a Declaration of a mans Râ—pentance by Baptism is required on mans part as well as Repentance it self to interesse him iâ— remission of sins but also with the guilt
actuall reception of it is the Baptism unto which especially and in the first place Peter in the Scripture before us exhorteth men sin his exhortation unto them to be baptized Otherwise we must make the sence and meaning of this his exhortation to rise thus Be ye baptized whether you be convinced of the necessitie yea or of the lawfulnesse of it or no and whether you have an opportunity for it which your consciences can in every respect approve of or no I suppose that Mr. A. himself will not put such a construction as this upon the Apostles exhortation unto Baptism Therefore it is a most unquestionable and undeniable truth that Peter in the Text in hand doth not simply or in all cases no nor yet principally or primarily exhort Repentants unto the actuall reception of water baptism but only unto such a vertuall eminent and constructive Baptism as that lately described and not at all unto water-baptism but only upon the terms and conditions specified under which indeed he that shall refuse this kind of Baptism declares himself a rebell against the Lord Christ as all Anti-paedo-baptists in the judgment of that worthy Martyr Mr. John Philpot do in not suffering children to come unto Christ by Baptism and during this rebellion cannot be interessed in remission of sins Sect. 92. If it be yet objected and said that questionlesse the repenting Jews whom Peter exhorted to be baptized understood him to speak of water-baptism only and of none other and consequently submitted unto his exhortation thus understood and were actually water-baptized without any more ado I answer 1. It cannot be proved that the Jews to whom he spake understood him in such a sencc only as that specified in the Objection 2. In case this could be proved yet will it not follow from hence that either they did well in not apprehending a further sence in his words or that Peter himself did not intend a further sence some such as that represented in them 3. Nor doth their ready and speedy betaking themselves unto Water-baptism at all argue that they understood him to speak of this Baptism simply or only because they being already before they came at the water baptized with that inward Baptism of the heart we speak of and being under no scruple or doubt whether it was the mind and will of Jesus Christ that they should be Water-baptized or no or whether the opportunitie before them was in all points legitimate or no the Apostles expresse order for their baptizing either by himself or by others authorised by him being a sufficient ground for their satisfaction in all these particulars they were obliged in conscience without any more adoe to be actually Water-baptized and it is freely acknowledged that all persons whatsoever being under the same terms of satisfaction with them both as touching a necessitie as touching a compleat legitimatenesse of an opportunitie are bound in conscience to be baptized with water as well as they Only with this proviso that though persons now be as fully satisfied touching a necessitie of being baptized as they were yet if the grounds of mens satisfaction in this kind now be unsound and sandie as they must needs be in case their opinion be true who judge the date of the necessitie of Water-baptism to be now expired their submission unto this Baptism though lesse sinfull then the contrary yet is it not justifiable Sect. 93. If it be yet said that it is no waies probable that Peter himself had any other meaning in his words when he commanded them to be Baptized but simply and plainly that he would have them forthwith to be water-baptized and consequently that he had no thought of any such Baptism eminently or vertually so called which you put upon him To this also I answer as hath in part been answered already That it is somewhat yea much more then probable that though Peter did not formally or explicitly mean any thing more in the words in question then what the Objection pretendeth yet he presupposed that kind of Baptism which we plead and that he would not have exhorted them to be baptized with water unlesse he had known them to be baptized already with that other Baptism The reason is evident because had he not supposed them either already satisfied before his exhortation directed unto them or at least that they would be satisfied by it that it was the will of Jesus Christ that they should be Water-baptized and that there was an opportunitie before them every wayes legitimate for their reception of this Baptism he would in the first place rather have endeavoured to satisfie them that this was the will and pleasure of Christ concerning them and that the opportunitie before them for receiving Baptism was every wayes legitimate and approveable then have either commanded or exhorted them to be presently baptized The result of this clear and thorow Examination of Peters exhortation to the Iews to be baptized for the remission of sins amounteth to this that the said Exhortation imposeth a necessitie upon no man of being water-baptized for the remission of sins in the great day but upon such persons only who stand under the like terms of satisfaction every wayes touching the said baptizing under which he exhorted the Iews to be thus Baptized If so then Mr. A's Notion or interpretation of this exhortation must needs fall to the ground which beareth that the said exhortation maketh it evident yea too evident to be denied by any but those that will not see that a Declaration of the repentance by Baptism he means by an actuall reception of Water-baptism is required on mans part he means universally and in all cases otherwise he would have distinguished to interesse him in remission of sins he means in such an estate of justification as the Scripture so frequently appropriateth unto true Beleevers immediatly upon their beleeving Such an inference or notion as this hath no more communion with those words for whence it pleads with such an unseemly confidence legitimacie of descent then shews have with substances and meer appearances with realities and truths Sect. 94. 3. Our Protestant expositours generally leave Mr. A's confidence and conceit upon the Text in the point in hand for the Papists to gather up who fall greedily upon them and make great treasure of them Although saith Calvin in the contexture of the words Baptism goeth before remission of sins yet in respect of order it followeth after because it is nothing else but an obsignation or sealing of those good things which we obtain by Christ that they may be ratified in our consciences a Tametsi in contextu verborum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 remissionem peccatorum hic praecedit ordine tamen sequitur quia nihil aliud est quà m bonorū quae per Christum consequimur obsignatio ut in conscientiis nostris rata sint Calv. in Act 2. 38. Gualter saith that Peter admonisheth them of outward Baptism which he commandeth them
yet peace before joy Rom. 14. 17. Melchizedeck's act in blessing Abraham is mentioned in the first place and his blessing the God of Abraham in the latter Gen. 14. 19 20. So likewise the burnt-offering is named before the sin-offering Levit. 12. 8. whereas the sin-offering was in order of time to go before it as appears Levit. 8. 14 18. and so again Levit. 9. 7 c. It were easie to multiplie instances in this kind I mean both where there is an interchangable expression of the same things in respect of prioritie and posterioritie as likewise where that which precedes in time is mentioned after that which in time comes behind it Therefore from the Order in Peters exhortation between Repentance and Baptism nothing can be argued to prove a necessitie that Repentance alwayes ought in respect of time to precede Baptism as neither did it precede in the Baptism of which notice was taken formerly 2. In case it were granted that from the Scripture yet on the stage it could be proved yea or were so evident as Mr. A. gloryingly over his adversaries pretendeth that remission of sins dependeth in part upon Baptism and that neither Faith Repentance Love Humility Self-deniall Mortification with all the heavenly retinew of the Graces of the Spirit can do any thing to the interessing men in this priviledge but only in conjunction with Baptism yet neither from hence will it follow that therefore Infant-baptism is unlawfull yea or not as available in this kind as Mr. A's after-after-baptism is Evident it is that there is no rational footing for either of these inferences in either of the premises For the lawfulnesse of infant-Infant-baptism supposed the contrary whereof as we even now demonstrated cannot be proved from the Scripture in hand there can be no reason to dis-interesse it in any priviledge or blessing which is vested in any Water-baptism whatsoever Sect. 98. Thus at last we see as by a noon-day light how unadvisedly and upon how slight grounds Mr. A. hath fallen un-Christianly foul and heavie upon his Christian Brethren dissenting from him in his sence about Baptism by adjudging the case against them thus It is too evidēt to be denied by any but those that wil not see from Act. 2. 38 39. That both Repentance and the Declaration of it by Baptism is required on mans part to interesse him in remission of sins sanctification of the spirit And as touching this latter the Sanctification of the Spirit that Baptism is not necessarily or universally required on mans part to interess him herein is of much more easie demonstration then the former But enough upon this account hath been said formerly considering how point-blank the Scripture lieth in many places against this conceit Review the eighth Section of this Discourse Although Mr. A. for cause best known to himself waves the impanelling of Act. 22. 16. to serve upon his Jurie as hath been formerly noted yet because Gehezi thinks himself wiser at this turn then his Master and will not lose the opportunitie and advantage so seeming to him of such a Scripture though the other letteth it passe let us bestow a few lines in the examination of it also The words are these And now why tarriest thou arise and be baptized and wash away thy sins calling upon the Name of the Lord. Paul himself reporteth these words as spoken unto him by Ananias upon his sight restored of which he had been for a season deprived by means of the glory of that light wherein the Lord Christ had appeared unto him from heaven as he was journeying towards Damascus Now because Ananias expresseth himself unto Paul thus be baptized and wash away thy sins some according to the tenour of Mr. A's Doctrine inferre that therefore Baptism washeth away sinnes i. procureth Justification or pardon of sinne in the sight of God But to this we answer 1. Substantiall proof hath been made and this by many arguments that remission of sinnes is the purchase or procurement of the blood of Jesus Christ and is obtained or received by such a Faith which is accompanied with a true Repentance and that it is not suspended either in whole or in part upon Water-baptism 2. Evident it is that Paul when and before the words in hand were spoken unto him by Ananias was in an estate of Justification before God and had obtained a remission of all his sins For 1. Ananias saluteth him BROTHER Saul Act. 22. 13. before he baptized him which doubtlesse had he judged him to be in an estate of Reprobation he would not have done 2. He prayed and this with acceptation in the sight of God before he was baptized Act. 9. 11. This also evinceth him to have been in favour with God before his said baptizing and consequently that his sinnes were forgiven him 3. When Ananias replied unto the Lord Christ speaking unto him in a vision and injoyning him to seek out Paul that he had heard by many how much evill he had done to the Saints at Jerusalem the Lord made him this answer Go thy way for he is a chosen vessell unto me to bear my name before the Gentiles and Kings and the children of Israel For I will shew him how great things he must suffer for my Names sake c. These things sufficiently declare him to have been in favour with Christ whilst he was yet unbaptized and so not to have been in a state of condemnation or under the guilt of his sinnes and consequently that his sinnes were not for given him either by means of or upon his baptizing 4. The Lord Christ had in a most extraordinarie and glorious manner revealed himself from heaven unto him telling him plainly that he was Jesus whom he persecuted and Paul beleeved him accordingly Act. 9. 5 6. Therefore certainly by this time he was in a state of acceptation with Christ and so cleansed from his sins 5. And lastly if his sins were in any such way or sence washed away in or by his Baptism as if untill now he had been in a state of wrath thorow a retainment or non-forgivenesse of his sinnes by God then had Ananias admitted an unclean person and a child of Sathan unto Baptism when he admitted Paul and consequently neither Faith nor Repentance nor yet the profession of either shall be necessarie to qualifie for Baptism unlesse it be said that Ananias acted contrary to Gospell rule in baptizing Paul Therefore certainly Ananias his meaning in saying unto him Arise and be baptized and wash away thy sins c. was not that by being baptized he should be justified in the sight of God or obtain the pardon and forgivenesse of his sins These as hath been proved having been forgiven him before his baptizing but that either 1. he should wash away his sins Typically or Sacramentally or else and rather 2. that upon his being baptized he should wash away his sinnes i. in his own expression and phrase cleanse himself from all
Gospell as well as the former But this discourse is a little eccentricall to our present businesse From the premisses it sufficiently appears how contrary to reason Mr. Alleu reasoneth when he saith p. 21. towards the end Besides their putting on of Christ in Baptism would be no reason why they were the children of God by Faith in Christ if we should understand their being the children of God constitutively aad not declaratively unlesse we will suppose that man is the child of GOD in his account notwithstanding his believing in Christ untill he be baptized into Christ This latter clause unless we will suppose c. I suppose is dis-sensed by his Printer by leaving out the particle a before man and the negative particle not after is But were it thus accommodated supplied it would do no feats for the accommodation of Mr. A's arguing For how their putting on Christ in Baptism is no effectuall argument or reason to prove that they were the children of God constitutively and could be no reason to prove them declaratively such hath been already debated even to evidence Sect. 108. Whereas he saith p. 22. in processe of the same discourse that the Apostle supposeth them to be Christs upon that very account of their being baptized into him and that this appears from ver 27 28 29. compared together the very truth is that he rather supposeth them to have been Christs before they were baptized into him otherwise he must suppose them to have been infidels yea strangers and enemies unto Christ when they were thus baptized or untill they had been baptized which doth not look like an Apostolicall supposall And as touching any appearance from ver 27 28 29. compared that the Apostle should suppose such a supposition as he asscribeth unto him I know no man that seeth the apparition but himself When the Apostle ver 29. concludeth thus If ye be Christs then are ye Abrahams seed c. his meaning alas is not if ye be or have been baptized then are ye Abrahams seed but if ye be Christs i. if ye relate unto him and so become his by a true and unfeigned Faith Thousands have been Baptized who yet are none of Abrahams seed About the middle of p. 22. he draweth us up the upshot or result of the Apostles discourse in the verses lately argued thus That persons by Baptism do make such a profession of Christ as by which they are characterised to be his If he means his by profession only aâ—d no further what he saith may passe for truth but certainly this is no part of the result of the Apostles discourse he speaks of If his meaning be any thing more and that by Baptism men make such a profession of Christ by which they are characterized to be his i. true or sound beleevers in him Mr. A. must prove that such a characterizing vertue is essentiall unto and inseparable from Baptism before he can make this passable with any considering man for a truth That which follows is of the same impertinent resentment If this then be that which is not as hath been proved viz. the characteristicall mark to distinguish the children of God from the world then it will follow but as the case is it will not follow that no other acknowledgment of Christ without this or with neglect of this is to be looked upon as any other then a partiall owning of Christ and not a compleat putting him on so as to be esteemed thereby visibly the children of God But most assuredly the putting on Christ by Baptism without putting him on by mortification holinesse of life c. is scarce so much as a partiall owning of him but rather a putting him to open shame as the Apostle speaketh and that which may be found in wicked men and of a Pagan conversation cannot reasonably be thought to adde much unto or to compleat the visibilitie of a child of God Sect. 109. But because Mr. A. doth so importunely hammer this nail here and afterwards over and over and yet over again contending that Baptism and Baptism only gives visibilitie to a Christian or Child of God and that no person whatsoever is to be esteemed visibly a child of God by means of all other visibilities in him whatsoever without this although the winning of this ground would yield him little or no advantage of standing to fight his battle of Ati-poedobapism let us briefly consider how friviolous and emptie how unworthy a considering man such a notion or conceit is For 1. Doth not himself and men of his judgment esteem those visible Saints or children of God whom they judge meet to be baptized and whom they are now about to baptize before or untill they have baptized them Or do they judge none but the children of the Divell or at least such who for ought they know may be such the children of the Divell meet to he Baptized Or in what capacitie or relation do they look upon those whom they are about to Baptize before they are baptized Either they must look upon them as Saints visible or as Saints invisible or as no Saints at all or as persons who may or may not be saints for any thing they know or can judg in one kind or other and under one or other of theâ—e considerations they must baptize them If they look upon them as Saints visible and in this capacitie baptize them how then doth Baptism give visibilitie of Saintship unto them when as they were visible Saints before baptized If they say they look upon them as Saints invisible what do they speak lesse then a contradiction taking the words visible and invisible in such a sence wherein they must of necessitie be understood in the case or question in hand For how can I judge a person to be an invisible Saint whom I have no visible i. no sufficient or competent ground whereof I am capable to udge him any Saint at all Or if I have any such ground is he not now a visible Saint unto me or a person whom I ought to esteem such If they look on them as no Saints at all and in this capacitie baptize them then they baptize men quatenus the children of the Devill or quatenus esteemed such and if so they are bound to admit none to Baptism but those who can give an account of their unbelief and of their relation of Son-ship to the Divell Or 4. and lastly if they look upon them as persons who may or may not be saints for any thing they know of them and in this condition baptize them then are they bound to receive none unto Baptism concerning whom they have any testimonie or ground to beleeve that they are the children of God nor indeed any but only such who are mere strangers unto them and of whom they never heard either good or evill Therefore Mr. A's conceit about the visibilitie of Saintship by means of Baptism is evidently overthrown by his own
being baptized but unto beleeving and for the visibilitie of this being or esteemablenesse of it with men neither is this either by any Law of God nor by any principle in reason annexed unto or made to depend upon Baptism so that it should not be lawfull for any person or Church to esteem such a man a visible member of Christ who hath not been baptized no it hath been proved over and over that every such person lawfully may yea and of duty ought to be esteemed a member yea a visible member of Christ who giveth a sober and sound testimonie of his Faith in Christ which as hath been shewed may be given severall other wayes besides Baptism yea and that that testimonie in this kind which is given by Baptism is but faint and of little or no authoritie with understanding and considering men especially being compared with that testimony which is given by a godly righteous and sober conversation in the world Again 2. Another reason why a matrimoniall being is and must needs be computed or estimated by such or such a solemn act done by the parties at the time of their marriage is because such an act as this I mean by which the Husband and Wife receive their matrimoniall being is not permitted unto nor is wont to be practised by any others but unto and by those only who receive this being Whereas persons may in some case be baptized and this by the will and according to the word of God who have no being at all in Christ much lesse any visible being as the case was with Simon Magus baptized by Philip and with multitudes of those who were baptized by John as was formerly observed Upon this account no mans either being or visibilitie of being in Christ can be reasonably Estimated by his being Baptized But this point we argued home lately Sect. 116. There is the same consideration of Mr. A's other comparison p. 24. As a man saith he receives a relative being as member of such a corporation by some solemne act done at the time of his enfranchisement even so men and women receive that relative Being which they have in Christ and as visible members of that spirituall Corporation whereof Christ is head and chief from that solemn act of their being baptized into him This similitude also halts right-down on that legg on which it should stand upright and strong to support the weakness of Mr. A's cause For the reason why a man must perform such or such a solemn act at the time of his infranchisement to receive a relative being as a member of such a corporation is because it is a by-law enacted in and by this corporation that no person shall be or shall be reputed to be a member hereof but such who shall perform this solemn act and that whosoever shall perform it shall be thus reputed Whereas God hath made no such Law or Statute as this that no man shall be reputed a member of Christ or a visible member of his but only they who shall be baptized we have demonstrated the contrary formerly Nor hath he any where determined or adjudged that whosoever shall be baptized how unworthy or wicked soever otherwise he shall be shall notwithstanding upon the meere account of his Baptism be esteemed such a member Therefore Mr. A. feeds but upon ashes when he nourisheth himself in his notion as well negative as affirmative of a Baptismall visibilitie of Saintship with such similitudes and comparisons as these But Sect. 117. Having with much ado at last satisfied himself though no man besides unlesse pre-satisfied with spreading this his conceit upon much paper he maketh this brief apologie by the way for the lenghth of that discourse I have insisted saith he p. 24. the more largely upon this particular to detect the repugnancie of that opinion against the plain current of the Scripture which holds Baptism needlesse uselesse amongst those who have made long profession of the Gospell though they as yet never were Baptized How Mr. A. may otherwise acquit himself in detecting the repugnancie he speaks of I shall not prejudge But if he hath no better light whereby to make the detection then what he hath shined from his pen in managing his last particular I am certain the opinion he speaks of will never be detected of any repugnancie either against the plain current of the Scripture or any more retired vein of it For if the main and principall end of Baptism be to make men visible members of Christ they who already are and who of a long time have been as visible members of Christ as Baptism can make them yea and more visible have no need of being Baptized more then he hath of a candle who enjoyeth the brightnesse of the Sun at noon day Upon the ground which he hath bought with a great summe of discourse although his title to it be crasie as hath been proved yet he builds with confidence enough p. 24. If then saith he that publique owning of Christ in Baptism by which men put him on and by upon which they are incorporated into Christ visibly be another end or use of Baptism as you see it is truly if Mr. A. speaks this to me he speaks not truly most clear and evident it is that this end and use is not to be found in the Baptism of Infants For further argument sake give we back again unto him his If or antecedent in this place which we have taken from him and let us weigh the reason he gives for his drawing the consequent here held forth unto us from it And the reason saith he p. 24 25. hereof is because Infants neither do nor can put on Christ in their baptism i. make an actuall declaration and profession unto the world that they own and acknowledg Christ to be come in the flesh to be the Son of God and Saviour of the world to be their Lord and Lawgiver as they doe who put him on in Baptism c. But Sect. 118. 1. From what quarter of the Scriptures can Mr. A. give us any steady intelligence that to put on Christ in Baptism is or signifies to make an actuall declaration and profession to the world that they own and acknowledge Christ Christ to be come in the flesh c. whether doth he think that all those who were baptized by John made such a declaration and profession as he speaks of viz. that they owned and acknowledged Christ to have been come in the flesh c. considering that the generalitie as it seems or however a very great number of these persons were in doubt and mused in their hearts of John whether he were the Christ or no Luk 3. 15 Or doth he think that the three thousand that were Baptized in one day by Peter or by his advice order made every man and woman of them a part such a formall actuall declaration and profession as he speaks of If he thus thinketh I
must professe that his thoughts are not mine Or can he find that such a declaration and profession was ever made by any person man or woman at the time of their baptizing yea or can he find where ever the making of such a declaration or profession was required at any mans hand at the time of his baptizing For though Philip said to the Eunuch If thou believest with all thy heart thou mayest be baptized this doth not amount to an injunction laid upon him to professe it much lesse actually to declare and professe it unto the world Nor did the Eunuch when he said I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God actually declare this his belief unto the world unlesse Mr. A. thinks that Philip here signifies the world 2. In case it should be granted that such a declaration and profession as that specified by him was made by those that were baptized in Scripture times unto the world I would willingly learn of him 1. whether this Declaration was not made by them before their baptizing 2. whether this Declaration did not make them every which as much if not more visible Saints or members of Christ as their Baptism did If so how can Mr. A's Doctrine lately taught by him as we have heard stand viz. that no person is to be looked upon as having a visible being in Christ by any Act Endowment or Qualification preceding Baptism But 3. Gratifie we Mr. A. with this that a publique owning of Christ in Baptism by which men put him on and by and upon which they are incorporated into Christ visibly c. be one end and use of Baptism yea and that Infants neither do nor can viz. by themselves and in their own persons make such a declaration and profession to the world as that mentioned yet from all this train of premises it doth not follow that therefore the said end and use of Baptism is not to be found in the Baptism of Infants The reason of this nonsequitur besides that it is in it self apparant enough hath been formerly given Sect. 67 68 69 73 c. 4. And lastly for this Be we yet more open-handed to Mr. A. and bestow upon him the grant that the end and use of Baptism of which he speaks is not found in the Baptism of Infants yet neither would this forbid water that Infants should not be Baptized because there being according to Mr. A's own principls severall ends of Baptism in case any one of these be attainable by the baptizing of Infants Infants lawfully may yea and of duty ought to be baptized See this further argued and proved formerly viz. Sect. 67. and 98. Sect. 119. Whereas he saith p. 25. that infants cannot with any proprietie of truth of speaking be said to put on Christ in Baptism 1. I suppose that neither can men or women with proprietie of speaking be said to put on Christ in Baptism To put on Christ whether in Baptism or otherwise is a Metaphoricall or borrowed expression not a proper 2. Why may not Infants with as much proprietie yea and truth of speaking be said to put on Christ in Baptism as Infants under the Law may be said to have put on Moses in circumcision Or did not infants in their circumcision as properly and truly put on Moses as men themselves did in theirs 3. Neither doth the Apostle say that they who have been baptized have put on Christ in or by Baptism this is Mr. A's glosse not the Apostles Text. His words are only these Gal. 3. 27. For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ It is not denied but that persons baptized may with good congruitie of sence be said to put on Christ in Baptism only this is denied that Mr. A. can evince or justifie such an expression or sence from the said passage of the Apostle For they who have been baptized into Christ may very possibly have otherwise put on Christ and not by this their baptizing into him This proposition They that have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ may be as Logicians speak propositio consecutiva and not formalis a proposition wherein the consequent is predicated of the antecedent not the thing signified or typified of the thing signifying nor yet the effect of the cause As when the same Apostle saith As many as are led by the Spirit of God they are the sons of God Rom. 8. 14. he doth not suppose that men are constituted or made the sons of God by being led by the Spirit of God but only declared to be so their constitution in this kind is by another cause or means In like manner a baptizing into Christ may be an argument or sign that men have put on Christ and yet not be that act by which or in which they formally put him on Nay the truth is that to put on Christ being or importing an act it cannot be transacted or performed in or by a mans being baptized because this importeth a passion If it be said yea but a submission or voluntarie offering of a mans self unto baptism imports an action and by this or in this he may be said to put on Christ I answer If Christ be put on by a mans offering himself unto Baptism which for ought I see at present may be granted then is he not put on by Baptism but before it yea and they may as properly be said to put on Christ who never are actually baptized as they who are For evident it is that in the baptizing of men and women the offering of themselves unto Baptism alwayes precedes their Baptism it-self and as evident again it is that men and women may offer themselves unto Baptism and yet possibly never be baptized as viz. when there is no person present that is willing to accept of their offer in this kind or to administer baptism unto them Sect. 120. Mr. A. having risen up early and gon to bed late and eaten the bread of much carefulnesse to give the best complexion and colour to his second Argument against the lawfulnesse of Infant-baptism which he was capable of giving and that of receiving and being loth that what he had so carefully planted should be presently pluck'd up by the hand of an objection he prepares and arms himself to discomfit if it may be that objection which in his apprehensiō threatned him with this damage First he takes a view of and describes his adversarie and then considers where he may find the best advantage against him and accordingly encounters him Against this whole argument saith he p. 25. which concludes Infant-Baptism unlawfull because the ends of Baptism concerning which we have heard all along the said argument that he is very doubtfull what they are are better attained in the Baptism of Beleevers and consequently are attained also at least to a degree and competently in the Baptism of Infants likewise it is objected That this might have been
been founded by God For though the letter of the Precept enjoyning Circumcision and so the practise of Circumcision conformable hereunto be purely Legall yet the reasons upon which the precept was given and the practise stood or ought to have stood were Evangelicall my meaning is that the Precept of Infant-circumcision was calculated by God for this end and with this intention given by him that by such an Administration as the precept directeth unto and injoyneth the Ordinance might be the more richly edifying to the Church now in being There is the same consideration of all other ceremoniall precepts and injunctions under the Law Though the matter of every of these precepts respectively or the externall ceremonie it self enjoyned was such that by no form whatsoever put upon it or by no ordering or disposing it it could be reduced to an equall serviceablenesse in matters of edification with the rich and high discoveries of the Gospell yet was it so ordered and disposed by God in the use and practique of it that it might yield to the Church the most spirituall benefit and best degree of edification which it was regularly capable to doe And if any thing appertaining to the manner of any legall service or ceremonie enjoyned had been altered or changed in the command and so in the practise from what was now directed and prescribed it would have been prejudiciall to the benefit and edification which the Church now received or might have received by those ceremoniall services Otherwise we must say that men themselves the Jews might possibly have bettered their spirituall condition by altering and changing at least in some particulars the Law given by God himself unto them and this for the advancement of such their condition The clear amount or consequent of this discourse is that in case there be any ceremonie or ceremoniall service enjoyned by God under the Gospell of like nature and consideration with any of those which were prescribed in the Law unlesse the manner and terms for the use practise or administration of it shall be the same at least in the main with those directed for the practise of the corresponding ceremonie under the Law this Gospell ceremonie must of necessitie be the lesse edifying by means of a variation in this kind Now that Baptism is a ceremonie or ceremoniall service under the Gospell corresponding with Circumcision under the Law is in it self so manifest and so generally by sober and considering men acknowledged that I suppose Mr. A. is too tender of forehead to deny it If so then it roundly followeth that inasmuch as the Law prescribed the ordinarie administration of Circumcision unto children the Gospell must allow or intend the like administration of Baptism unto children likewise otherwise the administration of it must be lesse beneficiall and edifying to the Christian Church Therefore Sect. 139. 4. Whereas Mr. A. saith that such Arguments and Pleas he means which are deduced from the example of Infant-Circumcision tend to draw down this part of the Gospell ministration he means the administration of Baptism as applicable unto Infants unto the line and levell of the legall doubtlesse he understandeth not what he saith For 1. if Baptism be no part of the Gospell but an appendix only which I suppose was sufficiently proved Sect. 102. then is not the administration of Baptism properly any part of the Gospell ministration but only an administration collaterall hereunto But 2. grant we the administration of Baptism to be a part of the Gospell ministration Mr. A. had small reason to complain that we by applying it unto Infants draw it down TO the line and levell of the Legall when as himself and his by denying it unto Infants draw it down many degrees beneath the Legall ministration he speaks of For this as we lately shewed made the best improvement of the Ordinances and ceremonies then on foot for the spirituall benefit and accommodation of the Church in edification and comfort that well might be and upon this account ordered the standing administration of Circumcision unto Infants Nor is the Gospel ministration it self in any such respect preferr'd before the Legal either by Christ Paul or any other Apostle viz. that the administration of the Gospel ceremonies is contrived either with more wisdom or more goodnesse by God for the accomplishing of the gracious ends intended respectively in them then the Law-ceremonies and services were in reference to their respective ends but partly because the ceremonies of the Gospell are more rich in signification then those of the Law were and consequently their respective ends are more rich and gracious partly because Gospell discoveries of God and of the mysterie of his will concerning the salvation of men are much more full and glorious then the Legal were partly also because there is a larger donation or effusion of the Spirit and so the hearts and consciences of men more effectually dealt with under the Gospell then under the Law So that that administration of Baptism which Mr. A. censureth compared with that which he approveth is rather a drawing up then a drawing down of the Gospell ministration if and so farre as this is concern'd in it to the line and levell of the Legall Sect. 140. Whereas in processe of his second proof of his minor Proposition which hangs heavie on his hand speaking M. A. p. 31. of Arguments drawn down by Poedo-baptists from the example of circumcision demands what are they else but such which are after the rudiments of the world and not after Christ i. e. such as are according to the ministration of the Law which was by Moses and not according to that of the Gospell which is by Christ p. 31. 1. Answer hath been made that in his sence of the clause after the rudiments of the world his Argument drawn down from Circumcision to prove the unlawfulnesse of Church-communion with Saints by him called unbaptized is as much or more after these rudiments as any the Arguments derived from the same fountain for Infant-baptism I here adde 2. That by the rudiments of the world Col. 2. 8. according a See Calvin Grotius Estius and others upon the the place to very able Expositours is not meant the Mosaicall ceremonies but Philosophicall Institutions and disputes And indeed the scope of the place well considered this interpretation will be found the most genuine and proper Therefore all that Mr. A. builds upon his ceremoniall sence of the Phrase to fortifie his second proof of his Proposition in hand which is upon the matter the whole building here is built upon a very slipperie and loose foundation which it self needeth establishment if any thing can be said to need that which it is uncapable to receive Yet 3. Understand we by the rudiments of the world Mr. A's understanding I mean Mosaiâ—all Ceremonies yet have we no ground at all to think that the Apostle rejecteth Philosophie or things of humane tradition as being after
consequent submission in Faith unto that Baptism which was administred unto a person without his antecedent consent in this kind may be as available unto him for all spirituall ends as an Antecedent submission could have been Let me put a case to Mr. A. Suppose any one or more of his Baptismall Proselytes should at the time of their taking up Baptism deceive both him and themselves conceiting that they submit unto it and take it up out of Faith when as they know not what true Faith meaneth which I have cause in aboundance to fear is a case of very frequent occurrence among the Proselytes of his newfound Baptism and it was the case of Simon Magus who it seems deceived both Philip and himself in his taking up Baptism but should afterwards come to be convinced of their errour and hypocrisie in this kind and thorow the Grace of God be brought to believe indeed is it Mr. A's sence that their Baptism because not submitted unto and taken up out of Faith at the time of their literall reception of it can now contribute nothing towards their receiving of the Spirit or have no influence upon them this way Or is it his opinion that in this case they ought to take another voyage by water to invite the Spirit unto them If it be certain I am that there is neither precept nor example in the Scriptures nor any competent ground in reason to support it But Sect. 152. 4. We have Examples in the Scripture of edification and spirituall benefit received by men afterwards by such both words and actions which at the time of the hearing of the one and transacting of the other were not understood by those who were in time thus edified by them When Peter thought it strange that his Lord and Master should come to wash his feet Jesus answered and said unto him What I do thou knowest not NOW but thou shalt know HERE AFTER a Ioh. 13. 7 Might not God have spoken in like manner to every child which he by his precept and order in that behalf circumcised under the Law the continuance of their lives untill years of discretion only supposed What I do thou knowest not now but thou shalt know afterwards Or is there not the same consideration of children in their Baptism When Christ said to Joseph and his mother how is it that ye sought me wist ye not that I must be about my Fathers businessâ— it is immediatly subjoyned And they understood not viz. at the present the saying which he spake unto them b Luk. 2. 49 50 but were they therefore in no capacitie of understanding it yea and of receiving spirituall benefit by it afterwards So again when Christ said thus to his Disciples The Son of man shall be delivered into the hands of men the Evangelist presently adds But they understood not this saying and it was hid from them that they perceived it not a Lu. 44. 45 viz. at the time when it was spoken unto them Was it therefore spoken unto them in vain or did it not do worthy execution upon their judgements and consciences in due time Severall other instances there are of like consideration See Joh. 10. 6. Ioh. 12. 16. Mat. 16. 6 7 c. we formerly shewed that the end of planting is not made void by the non-fructification of the tree at the time of the planting of it See Sect 69. So that Mr. A's first Answer in this place leaves his Objection in full force strength and vertue Nor doth his second answer any whit more disable it Infant-Baptism saith he is disagreeable to the Gospel-ministration M. A. p. 36. as it is the ministration of the Spirit in this respect also viz. as it requires all worshippers in all acts of worship in all the Ordinances of this ministration to worship God in Spirit with the mind in faith fear of the Lord. I answer that to this reasoning answer hath been given over and over For 1. it hath been opened that the Gospel-ministration is by the Apostle called the ministratioÌ„ of the spirit coÌ„paratively only not with any import or intimatioÌ„ that the ministratioÌ„ of the Law was in no respect or degree a ministration of the spirit also This Sect. 133 150. 2. It hath been proved likewise that the adnistration of Baptism is no part of the Gospel-ministration but an Appendix only unto it This Sect. 146. 3. It hath been made good That infant-Infant-baptism may be agreeable enough to the Gospel ministration though it should not agree with it in some one propertie or particularly in this as it is the ministration of the Spirit This Sect. 145. Therefore whereas he here pretends to give a reason why infant-Infant-Baptism should be dâ—sagreeable to the Gospel-ministration as it is the ministration of the Spirit doth he not pretend to give a reason of that which is not and withall take that for granted without proof which is denied by his adversaries Sect. 153. And whereas he appropriates it unto the Gospel-ministration that it requires all worshippers in all acts of worship to worship God in Spirit with the mind c. as if the Legall-ministration required not the same this Conceit of his also hath been made to lick the dust at the feet of the Truth Sect. 1â—0 145. So that we have here nothing but braided ware soiled and foiled notions But whereas in the further traverse of this Argument he professeth his ignorance or want of understanding how children should be uncapable of the Ordinance of the Supper and yet capable of Baptism especially considering Mr. A. 37 that they both represent the death of Christ both relate to the great benefit of remâ—ssion of sins c. I suppose that this Salve in his own Rhetorique is proper for this sore and will heal it without a scarr If Mr. A. can but understand how a child may be carried ten or twenty See Mr. Rich. Baxter plain Scripture proof for Infants Church-membership c. Part. 2. cap. 4. 114. miles and yet not be able to go this journey or the like upon his own leggs did not that bane of understandings prejudice and preoccupation here intoxicate him he may as well understand how a child may be capable of the Ordinance of Baptism and yet not of the supper For Baptism is an Ordinance of such a calculation nature and condition that as to the Elementarie and literall reception of it it requireth no principle of action aâ— all in its subject but passivenesse only as Circumcision also did under the Law which among many others to mention this briefly by the way is an Argument to me of a very considerable intimation that it was and is as an Ordinance principally intended by God for such subjects of man-kind which are meerly passive and know not how to act any thing in or about their reception of it The like counsell of God is observable in his enditing of that Ordinance which he intended
should occasion them to perpetrate such things which should and ought to be punished with such a judgment However by the consideration now last traversed in conjunction with the four preceding it is evident enough that Infant-baptism is a better Benefactresse unto Christian Churches in the spirituall good of edification then the practise lately risen up in competition with it And supposing only the practise of baptizing to be still in force and binding upon Christian Churches which may I doubt not be sufficiently proved from the Scriptures and however is one of the first-born Articles of Mr. A's faith there needs no other precept be inquired after in the Scriptures to warrant yea and more then to warrant I mean to commend the Administration of it unto Infants but only this lately mentioned Let all things be done to edification so understood as was briefly suggested Sect. 162. By this time I suppose an account in full hath been given why we denie this Proposition asserted by Mr. A. in his last Argument None ought to be baptized but those who appear voluntarily willing to be baptized in obedience to God although for the confirmation of the contrary Opinion much more hath been said by others and much more then both may or might be said yet further if matters of much more weight did not claim preheminence However let us hear and see what artificiall colour Mr. A. can put upon that which is not to make it seem to be The reason hereof saith he speaking of his said Proposition Mr. A. p. 38 is this because without this Obedientiall willingnesse Baptism will be unprofitable and fruitlesse to them and where we know the good of Baptism is not to be attained there it is not to be administred For in case we should it would be a prophanation of the Ordinance a taking of Gods Name in vain Though the sowing of seed be never so necessary yet it would be no mans wisdom but folly to sow in such a ground or at such a season which he knows will render his seed fruiâ—lesse I confesse if Mr. A. could prove that the good of Baptism is not to be attained by Infant-baptism or that the seed hereof sown in such a ground as he liketh not must needs become fruitlesse his Proposition might well laugh all opposition to scorne But such things may be a thousand times over said before once proved I doubt not but that the contrary is every mans belief who hath duly weighed the premisses Notwithstanding Mr. A. it seems hopes to find rocks in the air to build these castles upon That there is no reason he proceeds to expect otherwise but that Baptism should be unprofitable to all such who do not take it up voluntarily willingly and in obedience Mr. A. p. 38 unto God appears upon this account 1. Because now under the Gospel this is the standing Rule or Law between duties and rewards between the using of holy Ordinances and the benefit that comes by them viz. that duties be done and Ordinances performed willingly and in obedience to God And to make this stand he cites this of the Apostle 1 Cor. 9. 17. If I do this thing willingly I have a reward To this we Answer as we have in effect answered formerly Sect. 163. 1. That standing Rule and Law between duties and rewards of which he speakes was a Rule and Law in as much force under the Law as now it is under the Gospel See Sect. 127 130 145. And without Faith it was altogether as impossible to please God then as now This notwithstanding the counsell of the will of God was that the Administration of the great initiatorie Ordinance Circumcision should be made unto children But of these things formerly and I trust to satisfaction 2. The saying of the Apostle 1 Cor. 9. 17. is very impertinently cited for his purpose and so are the other two 2 Cor 8. 12. 1 Cor. 13. 3. For there is nothing more evident then that this scripture with those other speaks of persons actually capable by reason of years and understanding of performing duties and services upon the terms he speaks of viz. willingly and in obedience unto God And accordingly they who do baptize children ought to do it willingly and in obedience unto God and are like to receive no reward from God for this action unlesse it be thus performed But Baptism in respect of the baptized is no action or service performed nor doth the reception of it as such require any principle of action in the receiver See this sufficiently proved Sect. 76. and again Sect. 153. Notwithstanding as Circumcision though not received voluntarily willingly or in obedience unto God yet did afterwards profit the receivers when they did voluntarily willingly and in obedience unto God accept of his counsell therein Rom 2. 25. Rom. 3. 1 2. in like manner though Baptism be not voluntarily or willingly received the receivers not being capable of commending their reception of it upon these terms yet if it be voluntarily and willingly subscribed and owned by them and wisely improved afterwards the benefit of it will in full measure accrue unto them Yea I am of Mr. Calvins judgment in this that Baptism received in Infancie and so before a man hath done any good or performed any service at all unto God is in a way of reason more highly improveable to spirituall ends and purposes then when received after beleeving Sect. 164. But Mr. A. advanceth a second reason to prove Baptism unprofitable to all such who do not take it up voluntarily c. 2. Promises saith he made unto duty or upon condition of duty are rewards of that obedience which is yeilded M. A. p. 39. to God in discharge of duty when they are fulfilled thereupon Now it is no wise proper to say or rationall to suppose that God rewards his creature man for that wherein he is only passive they being such actions which we call morall and which proceed from the motion of the will governed by a divine Law that are rewardable by God And therefore unlesse Baptism be submitted unto willingly and in obedience unto God which cannot be supposed in Infants the good things annexed thereunto by way of promissorie recompence of such obedience connot upon any goood ground be expected I answer 1. Neither is it proper to say or rationall to suppose that promises made to duty or upon condition of duty are rewards of obedience c. For such promises are made or given before obedience and rewards for service do not use to be given before work or service But by promises I suppose he means things promised and yet is it very improper to say that things promised are made unto duty or upon condition of duty But acyrologies in speaking are of easie pardon when they have truth and worth of notion accompanying them to mediate for them 2. Whereas he saith that it is not rationall to suppose that God rewards his creature man
for that wherein he is meerly passive he saith nothing either to help his own cause or to harme the cause of his adversaries For who ever said on the one hand or proved on the other that Baptism was or is rewardâ—d by God unless the word be taken actively or for the act of baptizing which I know is not Mr. A's â—nce here NotwithstaÌ„ding it may be some question amongst wiser men then either he or I whether God in some cases may not reward his creature man for that wherein he is only passive and particularly whether he will not reward Rachels children as they are called Mat. 2. 18. for the losse of their lives by Herods murtherous crueltie although they were only passive herein But concerning Baptism there being nothing in it simply as such afflicting or grievous to the flesh but as it may be administred and received rather pleasing to it I know no ground why any man should look upon it as rewardable by God Only when as Mr. A. speaketh it is submitted unto in obedience to God I judge it to be rewardable by God according to the line and measure of other acts of obedience commensurable in difficultie of performance unto it But as I judge the obedientiall perseverance and continuance in the profession of baptism in those who were baptized when believers as much or more rewardable by God as their momentanie act in their first submission unto it and receiving it so I judge a conscientious owning and profession of their Baptism in those who were baptized Infants when they come to years of understanding and their perseverance in this profession unto the end altogether as rewardable by God as the voluntary taking up of the Ordinance in conjunction with the like perseverance in the other When Mr. A. shall offer unto me a considerable reason for the contrary I shall demurre untill this his reason and my understanding have conferd together about the case In the mean time I cannot but judg a conscientious owning of a mans Baptism whensoever received aswell and as much yea and as worthy a morall action as the receiving or taking it up at any time and consequently that the good things annâ—xed unto Baptism I mean unto a willing and obedientiall submission unto Baptism by way of a promissorie recompence may upon a very good ground be expected though not by Infants whilst such yet by persons who were baptized Infants when they come to be men and women and shall professe such an acceptance of or submission unto their Baptism Sect. 165. The third and last reason which Mr. A. offereth upon the account lately specified uttereth it self in these words 3. I have proved before in another Argument that now under the Gospel-ministration there is no benefit comes either Mr. A. p. 39 40. by Baptism or any other Ordinance but by means of his Faith who partakes thereof Without Faith it is impossible to please God Heb. 11. 6. i. e. in any service to approve ones self acceptable unto him For whatsoever is not of Faith is sin Rom. 14. 23. I answer 1. That I also have proved that neither did there any benefit come either by Circumcision or any other Ordinance under the Legal-ministration but by means of his Faith who did partake of them and yet God judged it meet that Infants should be circumcised Peruse Sect. 127 130 145 163. 2. It hath been lately shewed likewise that though children did not approve themselves unto God in their being circumcised yet God did approve of their Circumcision yea and they who Circumcised them did or might approve themselves unto him in the service What then hinders but that God may approve of childrens being baptized though children at the time of their baptism cannot approve themselves unto him And if Circumcision profited those who were circumcised â—nfants by means of that Faith which was found in them when they came to be men as we lately heard why may not the Baptism received in Infancie benefit the receivers of it by means of that faith which by the Grace of God comes to be wrought in them afterwards So that here is nothing in in this reason but what hath been out-reasoned over and over Yea Mr. A. himself it seems was aware that this Reason of his was Obnoxious to the Answers which have been given unto it but excuseth himself thus I shall not here again answer the case of Infant-Circumcision Mr. A. p. 40 which possibly may again rise up in the minds of some against what hath been now laid down in this Argument also but shall referre the Reader for satisfaction herein to what hath been already done about that subâ—ect in answer to another Objection as judging it sufficient at this turn also I answer that the Sanctuary unto which he sends his Reader to secure him from the force of the Objection which he feareth hath been polluted since the building of it and is razed to the ground See Sect. 120. to the end of Sect. 134. Sect. 166. Before he comes to grapple with that Objection or Argument of his Adversaries with the conquest and overthrow of which be thinks it honourable to sound a retreat and to ungird his armour he interlaceth this discourse I shall not proceed further to leavie more Arguments to Mr. A. p. 40. serve in this Controversie unlesse occasionally though many more of like import with the former might perhaps readily be formed and drawn up as judging these already insisted on abundantly sufficient to detect the vanity of Infant-baptism For answer remembring the Latine Proverb Suum cuique pulchrum every mans own is lovely in his own eyes I look upon Mr. A's conceit of an aboundant sufficiencie in his Arguments for the purpose he speaks of but as a strain of that weaknesse which is much incident to men It is the wise mans observation Every way of a man is right in his own eyes a Pro. 21. 2. Upon the account hereof it is no great matter of offence to me that Mr. A. pleaseth himself with a supposall that he hath detected the vanity of Infant-baptism By way of recompence I trust it shall be no great offence unto him that I am confident that instead of detecting the vanity of infant-Infant-baptism he hath detected the vanity of his undertakeing against it and hath confirmed the doctrine and practise which he opposeth by letting the world see how little weight either of reason or truth there is in such Arguments which are leviable against them and how there is nothing to be found in the Scriptures rightly managed and understood that condemneth or discountenanceth them But hear we the processe of this his by-discourse Nor shall I apply my self to answer those many contrary Arguments which are wont to be mustered up in defence M. A. p. 40. of infant-Infant-Baptism not because I count them or any of them impregnable or of hard or difficult attempt but partly because in those Arguments I
have produced there is a ground or foundation laid of answering all contrary reasonings and which is of easie application this way and partly because some of the chiefest arguments on that side have been produced already objection-wise and received their answer and partly likewise because this hath been sufficiently done by other hands and lastly for brevities sake as perceiving copious discourses hereabouts to be burthensome I answer Sect. 167. 1. That copious discourses about any Subject whatsoever when they want light and strength to make good their undertakings are for the most part burthensome No marvell then if such discourses written against the Doctrine and practise of Infant-baptism be burthensome Never yet did I meet with any Argument of one kind or other much considerable in that warfare or of any pregnant import to disable I do not say the lawfulness but the expediencie and consequently the necessity of infant-Infant-Baptism 2. Neither do I know any one ground or foundation laid by M. A. in his discourse in any degree competēt for the answering all contrary reasonings All his foundatians so called have been cast down or else evicted of the crime of irrelativenesse to his buildings If he be able to nominate any one of them in which one stone hath been left upon another or which is not guilty of the sin of impertinencie I will acknowledge his cunning to be beyond my expectation 3. Neither have any the chiefest Arguments on the Paedobaptists side been produced by him Objection-wise Neither hath he given the due weight to those produced by him neither hath he given sufficient and due answers unto them as produced by him 4. And lastly Neither hath the task or thing he speaks of been sufficiently done by other hands unless he confines his meaning in the word sufficiently to the inconsiderate partie of men and women who have gone wondering after his own judgement whose fancies and consciences being a little disturbd the shadows of mountains may very possibly seem men unto them or else unto such who through injudiciousnesse and weaknesse of apprehension some other occasions haply concurring are prepared to take the impressions of any light pretences for a new way To persons of this character what almost is not sufficient Mr. A. having super-sufficiently cōmended his preceding discourse against Infant-baptism in those supernumerarie passages lately rehearsed prepares to incounter his last enemie which he purporteth as such an objection over which if his pen be but able to magnifie it self he seems to suppose the doctrine of Infant-baptism will suddenly give up the ghost But because saith he there is one Argument which Mr. A. p. 40. seems to be much taking with some which as it is of a later invention the◠others so perhaps hath not received such answer and refutation as others have therefore as to this I shall give in somewhat by way of Answer Sect. 168. By the way the Reader may please to take knowledg and consider that all that Mr. A. hath pleaded for his opinion and practise against Infant-baptism being clearly disabled and refuted the credit of his cause is no◠recoverable by the Answer of an Objection though he should do it never so commendably and effectually For the goodnesse of a cause practise or opinion is not proved by the insufficiencie or weaknesse of an argument one or more that may be brought against them no nor yet by the weaknesse of all the Arguments and Reasons for the contrary which possibly have seen the light of the Sun hitherto but by Reasons and Grounds positively and pregnantly demonstrative of this goodnesse and such which with reason and truth cannot be gainsaid So that though Mr. A. should slay the Argument which opposeth him in his incounter with it yet can he not hereby raise his dead nor cause his Arguments again to live which are now as so many dead Corpses Notwithstanding let us go forward with him and first hear what the said Argument or Objection is as he hath pleased to propound it and then weigh and consider the substance and pertinencie of what he gives in by the way of answer unto it The Argument saith he is this If the love of God to persons be the first and originall ground of their being capable of Baptism then Infants are capable of Baptism But the love of God to persons is the originall or first ground of their being capable of Baptism Mr. Ap. 41. What he is pleased to subjoyn in the name of those whom he makes thus to argue by way of confirmation and proof of either Proposition respectively we shall understand when we come to hear and consider what he answereth unto it But before we are admitted to hear this we are desired to observe two things by the way 1. That this Argument contradicts another that is wont to be employed in this service to wit that the promise of God belongs to children of beleeving Parents and therefore Mr. A. p. 41 42. Baptism by which Baptism is restrained to such Infants only as are the children of believing Parents But by this Argument Baptism is made to appertain to all Infants whatsoever whether they be children of believing or unbelieving Parents because it supposeth all Infants to be in the love of God in the forementioned respect And therefore if this be true the other must be false in its restrained sence and contrarily if the other true this false So that you see the witnesses do no better agree in their evidence in this behalf then the false witnesses did that came against Christ in their testimonie 2. This Argument if it were good would render not only all Infants capable of Baptism but all men likewise whether Christian or Pagan because they are beloved of God in such a sence as its said Infants are viz. in having that sin of which they were guilty in Adam remitted unto them c. Sect. 169. Before I come to speak to these two by the ways I must desire also that one thing be observed by the way on the other side This is that I have ground in abundance to believe that he never heard any Paedo-baptist plead the cause of Infant-baptism by that Argument which here he undertakes to answer in those terms or tenour of words wherein he exhibiteth it and that he cunningly changed their terms that he might gain an advantage for his two by the waies especially the latter and withall be supposed to answer their Argument whilst indeed he only answers a mock argument of his own The Argument which I suppose he pretends to answer or would be thought to answer I acknowledg to have been sometimes urged by my self nor do I remember that I have met with it from either the pen or lips of any other In which respect I am able to speak with the more confidence what I have said The true tenour then of the Argument which Mr. A. should have answered had he quitted himself ingenuously is this
believers are capable hereof do not necessarily contradict the one the other in these sayings there being a sence wherein they may be yea and are both true For all children as such may be capable of Baptism and yet many of them yea all the children of believers only excepted in other respects uncapable There is a double capacitie of Baptism at least as the word capacitie may signifie the one in respect of the subject simply considered the other in respect of circumstance All children in case they should be regularly offered unto Baptism that is 1. freely and by those that have the right of their education as Parents if living or Guardians or Foster-parents in case the naturall be dead and 2. unto persons or baptists regularly authorized to Baptize them they might all be baptized But because Infidell Parents cannot be free in offering their children unto Baptism nor can they being under no Pastour or christian Church-officer offer or bring them to a person regularly authorized to baptize them it being irregular for any Churh to authorise their Pastor or other Officer to baptize the children of unbelievers in this repect these children of theirs are not capable of being baptized That poor Cripple who waited 38 years together for healing at the pool of Bethesda was all this while in respect of his person or as he was an impotent man as capable of healing as any of those who were healed yea had he at any time found such a friend as would upon the Angels stirring of the water have cast him in before some other had prevented him he had been actually healed But being helplesse in himself and friendlesse he was under these circumstances in no capacitie of being healed by those waters A Virgin in respect of her years and person every wayes may be capable of marying such or such a man yet in respect of the charge and command of her Parents under whose power she yet remains to the contrary she may be uncapable of so marrying Yea the man himself with whom in the respect mentioned and in many others she is capable of marrying may notwithstanding be a person so or so conditioned as for example may be an Idolater or son of a strange God or the like that she is not in a regular actuall capacitie of marrying with him Many cases of a like exemplification might be proposed It were easy to produce many sayings out of the Scriptures themselves which do every whit as much contradict the one the other as those catched at and compared by Mr. A. whose consistencie notwithstanding is readily enough salveable by distinguishing partly between positives and respectives partly between respectives and respectives The three particulars now propounded duly considered it appears that Mr. A. hath made no bargain at all either for his credit or for his cause by the way but it may be matters will succeed better with him at his journeys end And I confesse that if he can come off with credit from his incounter with the argument now before him he will do more for the cause of Ana-baptism then hath been done for it as far as I can understand these many years although neither is the goodnesse of that cause sufficiently evinced by never so sufficient Mr. A. p. 41 42. an answer given to one argument bent against it But let us now hear how he quitteth himself in his answer hereunto But to come closer to the Argument I do deny the consequence of the Major Proposition I doe deny that it therefore Mr. Ap. 42. 43. follows that Infants are capable of Baptism though it should be granted that the love of God is the originall ground of rendring persons capable thereof And the reason of this deniall is taken from that difference which is between the originall ground of persons capabilitie of Baptism and the next immediate ground hereof For howsoever the love of God be the ground of all dispensations of good to the creature yet it is not so from the self same respect but as it exhibits it self in one dispensation of it in one respect so in another Dispensation thereof it exhibits it self upon other terms and respects And thereforce we must distinguish between the love of God as it is the ground of Baptism The love of God then is to be considered either 1. in the whole entire summe or body of it generally and indefinitely considered as comprehending and inclosing in it all particular dispensations of Grace towards the creature or else 2. as it excites or puts forth it self in those particular dispensations themselves The love of God in the former sence though it be the the ground of all particular acts of Grace and so that also which appertains to Baptism yet is it no sound way of reasoning to conclude persons to be in an immediate capacitie of Baptism because they are in the love of God under this generall consideration For upon the same ground men might as well argue infants to be strong Christians or fit to be chosen Pastors Teachers or Deacons as to argue them capable of Baptism because persons are in these capacities by vertue of the love of God to them And yet who sees not how absurd it would be to reason thus If the love of God to persons be the originall ground which renders them capable of being chosen into the office of Pastor Teacher or Deacon then Infants are capable of being chosen into these Offices because they are in the love of God c. If the love of God to persons be the originall ground of rendring them capable of the denomination of strong Christians then Infants are capable of the denomination of strong Christians Because they are in that love and favour of God But c. By the light then of these Instances the invaliditie indeed absurdity of concluding Infants to be capable of Baptism because they are in that love and favour of God may you see be sufficiently discerned Sect. 172. Never did there a more impertinent piece of discourse shew it self on paper then this and yet what joy doth Mr. A. make in the winding of it up For 1. It runs all along upon a palpable and wide mistake of the Argument unto which it pretends the relation of an Answer as was lately observed Infant baptizers argue Infants capable of Baptism from their relation of Son-ship unto God Mr. A. answers and labours to prove though very unhandsomely too that the love of God to them doth not render them capable thereof as if the relation in men of Son-ship unto God and the love which is in God towards men were one the same thing May not a man as well suppose that the silver which is in my purse and the gold which in his is one and the same thing 2. The Argument which Mr. A. should answer buildeth a baptismal capacity in Infants upon that which it calleth the originall or first gound or qualification for Baptism in the
not satisfied in my self whether I hit Mr. A's Notion right or no. But if I do then he may please to consider Sect. 180. 1. That that which immediatly qualifies any Subject whatsoever for Baptism is somewhat already in being in this subject before Baptism be applyed unto it not any capacity in in to receive somewhat by or after Baptism It is true there is no subject duly qualified for Baptism but what is in a capacitie of receiving benefit after and by means of his baptizing and it hath been proved over and over that Infants are in such a capacitie as this aswell as men But however it is not such a capacitie as this which qualifieth either the one or the other for Baptism for then all persons whatsoever of mankind young and old should be qualified for it inasmuch as they are all in some capacity this way 2. That although it should be granted or could be supposed that Infants are in no capacitie of any additionall love of God by means of Baptism beyond what they are possessed of before yet supposing withall that their Parents may receive any additionall comfort concerning the Grace and Love of God towards them by means of their Baptizing or that they judge themseves bound in Conscience to procure or indeavour their baptizing neither of which is any unreasonable supposition it will not follow that the application of Baptism unto them should be superfluous or vain But I am here in the dark only here is a sufficiencie of light whereby to discern that in this paragraph here is neither little nor much to comfort the heart of Mr. A's fainting cause under the burthen of that Argument that lies still so hard and heavie upon it But as if hitherto he had only combated with the Major Proposition of the Argument whereas indeed he hath had his sayings in Folio to them both his next ingagement is against the proof of the Minor Whereas saith he it is alledged by way of proof of the Mr. A. p. 45 46. minor Proposition 1. That the reason why Faith is necessary in persons who have not been baptized in their infancy to render them capapble of Baptism is because it is that mean by which those that are to admit unto baptism come to know that they are in the love of God and that if such a thing could be known without such a profession of Faith as it may in the case of Infants then such a profession would not be necessary in order to such an admission To this I answer likewise i. That a profession of Faith in such persons to render them admittable to Baptism is not necessary to inform them that admit them touching Gods love to them in any respect whatsoever for this may be known without such a profession but in relation to their knowing them to be in the love and favour of God in that particular respect and determinate consideration which renders men immediatly capable of Baptism In this respect such a profession of Faith is necessary because without it the love of God to them upon such terms is not knowable and consequently they not admittable to Baptism as was before proved by which Infants as touching their capability of Baptism are clearly excluded This is the first advance of Mr. A's Answer to the proof as he calls it of the Minor Proposition For Answer unto this Answer Sect. 181. 1. The proof he speaks of doth not hold a necessitie of Faith in the persons mentioned to render them known to those who are to baptize them for persons being in the love God To be in the love of God imports a love in God born towards them not any thing in them towards God Now it hath been oft said that that which immediately and formally qualifieth for Baptism must be somewhat in the creature or subject it self not any thing in God Therefore Mr. A. doth not here argue to the sence of his adversaries nor answer any thing to their Argument But 2. The very Tenour and substance of his Answer as it is quite besides the Argument against which it pretends so is it otherwise most irrationall and importune For 1. This Answer saith that a profession of Faith in persons admittable unto Baptism is not necessary to inform Mr. A. p. 46 those that admit them touching Gods love to them in any respect whatsoever for this may be known without such a profession If he speaks of any such love of God to the persons admittable unto Baptism which is commonly called common and is born by him unto all his creatures and all men without exception he doth not only argue quite besides the sence of his Adversaries but that which is very disingenious quite besides what himself knows to be their sence For how should it ever enter into Mr. A's heart to imagine that his Adversaries should affirm or hold that it is necessary for Baptizers to be informed by one means or other concerning the common love of God towards persons to be baptized If he speaks of that love of God which is peculiar to his children and those who believe I desire to know of him how this in the persons to be baptized may be known to the persons baptizing without such a Profession as he speaks of He should have done well at least to have named the means or way by which this knowledge may otherwise be attained for I confesse I am wholly ignorant of it Again 2. Whereas this Answer further saith that a Profession of Faith is necessary in relation to the Baptizers knowing them to be in the love and favour of God in that particular respect and determinate consideration which renders men immediatly capable of Baptism I would be a debtor unto him for his good information if he would inform me what this particular respect and determinate consideration is wherein the love of God renders men thus â—mmediatly capable of Baptism For unlesse it be the relation of Son-ship I confesse I am to seek However in this part of Mr. A's Answer we have nothing distinct nothing but what savours of a fear or loathnesse to speak plainly But to this first member of his Answer he subjoyues a second in these words 2. The profession of Faith is necessary in the case in hand Mr. Ap. 46. for other causes then meerly to inform those that admit persons unto Baptism of their being in the favour of God in generall whom they do admit and that is to let them know that they are capable of the severall ends and benefits of Baptism and so meet for Baptism it self because unlesse they have reason to conceive that they have Faith they have no reason to conceive them in a present capacitie of the ends and benefits of Baptism and so not of Baptism it self inasmuch as these are suspended on Faith as hath already been evinced I answer Sect. 182. 1. Mr. A's Adversaries never affirm'd that a profession of Faith is necessarie to inform
any person whasoever of the favour of God in generall towards persons to be baptized Nor did they ever denie but that such a profession might be necessary for some other causes besides an information of mens being in the favour of God whether generall or speciall So that the former part of this latter Answer is a meer impertinencie 2. Whereas he supposeth and in effect saith that Baptizers have no reason to conceive persons to be in a present capacitie of Baptism it self unlesse they have reason likewise to conceive them in a present capacitie of the ends and benefits of Baptism I answer 1. if by a present capacitie he means a capacitie which is at present vested and found in the subject in this sence Children are in a present capacitie of the ends and benefits of Baptism as well as men For there is at present and whilst they are yet children a capacity of the ends benefits of Baptism vested and residing in them This hath been shewed and proved formerly Sect. 64 65 68 69. 2. If by a present capacity he means as I suppose his meaning is such a capacity which renders its subject actually and at present capable of the said ends and benefits of Baptism it hath been formerly shewed and proved once and again that such a capacitie is not necessarie to render a person capable of Baptism more then a like capacitie of the ends and benefits of Circumcision was necessary to render Children capable of this Ordinance under the Law Peruse Sect. 69 152. with others So that we have nothing but overthrown Notions and Conceits to make up this Answer But it seems Mr. A. hath been troubled with a second proof of the said minor Proposition which he lifts up his pen to disable in the next place We shall give him somewhat more then the hearing of what he hath to say to this proof also although by the way this is more then the confirmation and proof of our Argument in hand and consequently of the intire cause of Infant-Baptism requireth at our hand For when an Argument is regularly formed one sufficient proof given for the truth of either Proposition I mean both of the Major and the Minor renders the Argument as authentique and concluding as many proofs of either could do Now against the form of the argument in hand no exception hath been nor with either reason or truth can be taken However let us see Mr A. and the second proof he speaks of play together before us Whereas in the second place saith he it is said that it was upon this ground viz. of Gods loving him that Christ himself was capable of Baptism and not his Faith in as much as he had no such Faith as is required of men to render them capable of Baptism to wit a Faith in God touching the remission of sins through Christ and that yet Christ did not receive Baptism upon any terms extraordinary but upon the same terms as others do in as much as it was in conformity to a standing Law of righteousness common to others as well as him This proof is not drawn up either in terms or in substance of notion to the sence of Mr A's Adversaries as we shall shortly declare in particular however let us see whether the peny of it be not better silver then the Answers To this I answer That this Reason is built upon a mistaken ground as supposing Christ to have no such faith as MIGHT render him capable of Baptism at least such as is required of other men in order thereunto for Christ had the same faith which Mr. A. p. 47. is required all other persons in that case For what Faith was required of other men to render theâ— capable of Baptism save this viz. To beleeve that Jesus Christ is the Son of God For so when the Eunuch demanded of Philip See here is water what hindreth me to be Baptised Then Philip answered and said If thou beleevest with all thine heart thou mayest And he answered Philip again and said I beleeve that Iesus Christ is the Son of God I Answer Sect. 183. Whereas Mr A. saith that the Reason which he is to Answer is built upon a mistaken ground the truth is that this is not the building of the reason but of the answer here made to it For 1. The reason he speaks of doth not speak as he makes it to speak viz. That it was upon the ground of Gods Love to Christ that Christ himself was capable of Baptism But what speaketh it it speaketh this That it was the relation of Son ship in Christ unto God that rendered him thus capable How material the difference is between these two hath formerly been opened 2. Whereas this answer saith that Christ had the samâ— faith which is required of all other persons in that case it builds upon another mistaken ground For that the faith which was in Christ was essentially and specifically differing from that which is reqâ—irea of â—ther persons in the case he speaks of is evident from hence viz. because such properties which are essential unto and do universally accompany that faith which is required of other persons in the case specified were wanting in the faith of Christ That faith which is required of other persons in the said case must be accompanied in its subject with repentance for siâ— perpetrated and committed This is so essential unto this Faith that without it no Faith whatsoever gives unto the persons we speak of a regular capacity of Baptisme * At least according to Mr. As. principles Yea Baptisme as we have oft heard is described by its relation unto Repentance not unto Faith as the more proper and signal qualifier of the two for its reception Therefore that Faith which is not accompanied in the same subject with repentance is not of that kind or species of Faith which is required in persons in order to their baptizing and consequently that Faith which was in the Lord Christ not being thus accompanied for he that never sinned could not repent of his sins was not could not be of the same kinde of Faith with that required in other persons Again that kind of Faith which is required of ordinary men and women upon the account before us in all and every the particular and individual actings and residings of it obtaineth remission of sins But the faith which was in Christ obtained no remission of sinnes Therefore it was a Faith of a differing kind from the Faith required of other persons Sect. 184. Yet again upon that Faith which is required in other persons c. this Law is imposed by God in all and every the residings of it viz. that upon the first coming of it unto and working of it in the soul a profession or declaration of it â—b â—eopenly made by Baptism This is Mr. A's own a vouched Doctrine in the premises and is also asserted by him in the sequel of his present Answer
upon this account baptize him Therefore according to the tenor of your late reasoning neither did he baptize him upon the account of his being in favour with God or of his relation of Sonship unto God To this I answer that although John knew Christ to be the Son of God when he declined the baptizing him as well as afterwards when he baptized him yet it seems he did not at present so wel consider that he being the only begotten Son of God and so a person in dignity infinitely transcending other men it was meet for him being a weak and sinful man to baptize him until the Lord Christ himself admonished or informed him of the meetness of the thing the transcendent dignity of his person notwithstanding Suffer it to be so now for thus it becometh us to fulfill all righteousness Mat. 3. 15. as if he should have said How true soever it be which thou alledgest against thy baptizing me as viz. that thou hast need to be baptized of me and not I of thee yet be content to do what at this time and upon the present occasion I desire of thee because it becometh me notwithstanding the peculiar dignity of my person yet in respect of my mediatory undertaking to condescend to every thing which is righteous or meet for other men to submit unto So then if it be righteous and meet for other persons who are the sons of God and because or as they stand in this relation unto him and not meerly as they are beleevers to be admitted unto Baptism then did Christ desire Baptism and was accordingly baptized as or because he was the Son of God although it be true that he was indeed the first born amongst many brethren as the Apostle speaks and so his relation of Sonship of an higher nature then other mens Sect. 188. Now that other persons are not regularly admittable unto Baptism nor ever were in the Apostles times admitted hereunto simply and meerly as or because Beleevers but as or because their faith thorough the profession of it did declare them to be the Sons of God and so iâ— special favour with him is beyond all controversie evident upon these grounds 1. If beleeving Jesus Christ to be the Son of God gives a regular capacity of Baptism as it is simply beleeving and not as it declares the Beleever to be the Son of God and in special favour with him then is the Devil himselfe or at least may be in a regular capacity of being baptized The reason of this consequence is evident because he beleeves Jesus Christ to be the Son of God or at least is a sufficient capacity to believe it The Apostle saith that he was mightily or with power declared to be the Son of God according to the spirit of holinesse by the resurrection from the dead Now the devil is very capable of any rational demonstration how much more of such which are pregnant and full of power to convince And though he be a lyar and the Father thereof yet being subtile and wise in his generation he is not like to lye to his own disadvantage which yet he must be supposed to have done when he said unto Christ I know thee who thou art the holy one of God Mark 1. 24. â—f he had lyed in so saying So that there is little question of the validity and truth of the consequence in the said major proposition Now that the Devil is or may be in a regular capacity of being baptized is I presume none of Mr. A's thoughts Therefore believing simply as beleeving doth not qualifie for baptisme but as it selfe being professed or declared declareth the Professour of it to be a child of God 2. If believing simply as believing inrights unto baptism then did Philip put the Eunuch upon harder and stricter termes to satisfie himselfe about his meetnesse to be baptized when upon this account he required of him or imposed on him a beleeving with the whole heart Act 8. 37. then his commission in that behalfe allowed him to do And indeed his admonishiâ—g or presting the Eunuch to believe with all his heart plainly intimated that it was such a Faith or beleeving which would render him capable of Baptisme to his own comfort by which he could approve himselfe to be a child of God If so then is it not the simple or absolute nature or act of beleeving but that relative or declarative nature oâ— property of it we speak of by vertue or meanes whereof it gives a capacity of baptisme unto men If so then it readily follows that it is the relation of Son-ship unto God which originally primarily and directly investeth with this capacity and that wheresoever and in whomsoever this may reasonably be presumed to be there is as rich as regular a capacity of baptisme as beleeving by means of the profession of it can give unto any man And that it is the property of Faith to give unto men the relation we speak of I mean of Son-ship unto God is the loud vote of the Scripture from place to place Joh. 1. 12. Gal. 3 26. and elsewhere And if Faith gives the relation of Son-ship the profession or declaration of Faith must needs give knowledge of this relation unto men Sect. 189. If it be here replyed true it is Faith professed declareth a person to be the Son of God but it followeth not from hence that therefore it qualifieth for baptisme in this consideration I answer if this be the noblest and highest consideration in Faith viz. that it gives the relation of Son-ship unto God makes a man or a woman to become a child of God which I suppose is no mans question then must it needs be the highest consideration also in the profession of it that it declares a man or woman to be the childe of God And if these things be so it undeniably followeth that either it is somwhat that it is meaner and lower in Faith and so in the profession of Faith which instates men in a capacity of Baptism or else that it is that relative declarative nature in it of which we speak which thus enstateth them Now then if Baptism be to be looked upon as a matter of favour or priviledge vouchsafed by God unto men or unto his children it is unreasonable to conceive or think that he should conferre it upon the account of that which is meaner and lesse considerable in them passing by that which is more excellent more considerable and worthy 3. If faith giveth not right unto Baptism in that declarative consideration mentioned then giveth it in some consideration relating to it as for example either as it is simply an act or as it is such or such a kind of act or as it relateth to such or such an object or the like But there is no other consideration in Faith by vertue whereof it can so much as tolerably be conceived that it should give a capacity of Baptism Therefore it
must needs be conceived to give this capacity in the consideration specified Nor can it here reasonably be pretended in opposition to what hath been said that it gives the capacity now contended about in consideration of the ordinance or appointment of God that so it should do or that by vertue of such a divine ordinance as this it gives the said capacity For 1. When we affirm that it gives the capacity so oft specified by vertue of the declarative property of it frequently likewise mentioned we do not exclude the ordinance or appointment of God in this behalfe but suppose or include it altogether We believe that faith doth not justifie or make a child of God but by vertue of the will appoyntment or ordination of God in this kind nor do we beleeve that it gives the capacity of Baptism upon any other â—erms I mean without the ordinance or appoyntment of God But Sect. 190. 2. Whensoever God by the counsel of his will or by his appointment settleth any priviledge or benefactory power upon any grace act or service of his creature he doth it stil in consideration of or with an eye unto something that is considerable in or about this Grace act or service which commendeth it unto him as meet and proper for an investiture with such a priviledge He doth not invest every Grace or every service with every priviledge but confers priviledges with an exact proportion to each Grace or service priviledged by him in respect of some thing or other considerable in them in reference to such a collation Now then when we affirm and say that faith gives a right unto Baptism as it is declarative of Son-ship unto God our meaning is that this declarative property is that consideration in it in regard whereof God judged it meet to be invested with such a priviledge as to give a capacity of or a right unto baptism unto all those in whom it should be found and hath invested it accordingly Thus then all things duly weighed and considered it fully appeareth that the device which Mr. A imagined against the argument or objection lately propounded by himselfe is too great for him to perform By the light of all these late discussion it is sufficiently evident that faith in no other considerations intrinsically appertaining to it gives a capacity of Baptism but onely as it is declarative of Sonship and that this is the original and proper qualification for Baptism and that being by any probable much more by any demonstrative argument made known unto those who have a right to baptise baptisme ought not to be denied unto it Whereas Mr. A. very operously and with the quotation of many Scriptures labours to prove the Eunuch's Faith I beleeve Jesus Christ to be the son of God was none other then the Faith of the Gospel and the common form of Beleevers confession and again that Christ had this Faith i. e. that he beleeved himselfe to be the Son of God he might to as much purpose and well nigh with as much pertinence to his cause have spent his paines in proving the Sun to be up at noon day If he could have proved First that Christ's faith was of the same nature and consideration with the Faith of beleevers And secondly that he was baptized by John upon the account of this his Faith simply and absolutely considered he had made the face of his cause to shine at least to a degree but being defective in these his labour and cost otherwise signifie nothing Sect. 191. What he speaks afterward concerning Christ making a dedication of himselfe unto the service of professing and publishing the Gospel by the solemnity of baptisme as others did and ought to do he speaks upon no steady no nor probable account in reason For Christ doubtlesse had made a dedication of himselfe to the service he speaks of long before his receiving the solemnity of Baptism yea and had professed the Gospel and declared himself the Son of God For being yet but twelve years old he was found in the Temple discoursing the things of God amongst the Doctors so called of those times And to his Parents his Mother saying thus unto him Son why hast thou dealt thus with us behold thy Father and I have sought thee sorrowing he returned this answer How is it that ye sought me wist ye not that I must be about my Fathers businesse Luke 2. 46. 49. So that now he both professed himselfe to be the Son of God and declared also that he had dedicated and devoted himselfe to that work of his about which he was sent whereas he was not baptized till about the thirtieth year of his life Luke 3. 21. 23. Or if Mr. A's meaning be that Christ was now comming forth into the world to professe and publish the Gospel openly when he was baptized the expresse letter of the Evangelical History riseth up against him For Christ did not thus profess or publish the Gospel untill Johns casting into prison Matth. 4. 12. 7. Mark 1. 14. which was some considerable time after his baptizing for presently after his baptizing he was led by the spirit into the wilderness and there continued forty days and forty nights amongst the wild beasts Mark 1. 13. Matth. 4. 1 2. which importeth as Theophylact well observeth that all this time he continued in such a part of the wildernesse where men were not wont to come So that all this while he did not professe or publish the Gospel openly unless it were to the wild beasts or the Devil Nor can it be proved that Johns casting into prison immediately followed the abode of Christ in the wilderness indeed the contrary appeareth from the Scriptures yet shal we not argue this at present So that M. A. is out of the way of truth at this turn also Why Christ deferred his baptism to that time when he received it may be shewed in the progress of this answer very speedily But however Paedo-baptists claim countenance to their practice from the baptisme of Christ Mr. A. hath a conceit that from it he can frame an argument against their practise and this as he saith without wresting it as if it were somewhat a singular thing with him to argue against his adversaries without wresting the Scriptures which he manageth against them His argument is a little prolix and encumbred with words yet let us give it a patient hearing as himself layeth it down If Jeâ—us Christ his being baptized at that season and upon that occasion when he began to profess and publish the Gospel and not before was in conformity to a Law oâ— righteousness in this behalf then those that are baptized who yet make no such profession as Infants are are not baptized inconformity to that Law of righteousness But Christ his being baptized at that season and upon that occasion when he began to profess and publish the Gospel and not before was in conformity to a Law of righteousness in
this behalf Therefore those that are baptized as Infants are who yet make no such profession are not baptized in conformity to that Law of righteousness To this argument we answer 1. That Mr. A. may be gratified with a concession of the whole Argument conclusion and all and yet his cause not gratified at all hereby nor the cause of his adversaries at all impaired Sect. 192 For what though Infants are not baptized in conformity to that Law of righteousness according unto which Christ was baptized it doth not presently follow from hence that therfore they are baptized in conformity to no Law of righteousness at all There must go two words as the common saying is to this bargain Isaac in conformity to a Law of righteousness was Circumciszd on the eighth day Gen. 21. 4. Abraham also was Circumcised in conformity to a Law of righteousness yet was he not circumcised in conformity to that Law of righteousness according unto which Isaac was circumcised for he was not circumcised untill the 99. year of his life Gen. 17. 24. Mathias was chosen into the place and office of an Apostle in conformity to a Law of righteousness yet he was not thus chosen in conformity to the same Law of righteousness according to which Peter Andrew and the rest were chosen for he was chosen by the decision of the lot between Barsabas and him Act. 1. 26. whereas the other were chosen either by a call from the mouth of the Lord Christ himself or else by his entertaining them upon their voluntary applications of themselves unto him which seems to have been the case of Andrew and Peter and another Joh. 1. 3â— 38 40 41 42. And as the Apostles were all true Apostles and all lawfully called although the terms or forms of their callings were various and as those who were circumcised men and those who were circumcised infants under the Law were all lawfully and truly circumcised though the times of their respective circumcisions were differing in like manner they who are with Christ baptized about the thirtieth year of their lives not having formely been baptized and they who are baptized before the thirtieth day of their lives may lawfully or by a like though not the same law of righteousness be baptized So that Mr. A. doth but beat the air not his adversaries with this syllogism Sect. 193. 2. That which this argument taketh for granted and upon which the whole stress of it resteth viz. that Christ should be baptized at that season and upon that occasion when he began to profess and publish the Gospel and not before hath been lately cashiered upon the delinquencie of errour found in it The true reason to give knowledge of this by the way why Christ was baptized at that season of which he now made choice for that purpose was as the Evangelist Luke seems to insinuate Luk. 3. 21. that in the midst of that great confluence of people which came unto John to be baptized he might receive a testimonie from heaven that he was the Son of God This account of the time or season of his baptism was given by Hierom long ago The context in Luke very much favoureth it Now when all the people were baptized it came to passe that Jesus also being baptized and praying the Heaven was opened and the Holy Ghost descended in a bodily shape like a Dove upon him and a voice came from heaven which said Thou art my beloved Son in thee I am well pleased Luk. 3 21 22. The multitude of those who came unto John to be baptized and were now baptized accordingly is here mentioned 1. As the occasion of Christs coming to be baptized and of his baptism accordingly and 2. Together with this baptism of Christ as an occasion both of the opening of the heaven and of the descent of the holy Ghost in a visible shape upon him and as the end of these two of that voice that came from heaven and said Thou art my beloved Son c. The Evangelist Mathew also c. 3. 13. compared with the foregoing part of the Chapter glanceth a like intimation For having first reported the great numbers that had been baptized by John as viz. Jerurusalem and all Judea and all the region round about Jordan ver 5 6. subjoyning the tenor of Johns Doctrine and Exhortation to those that had been baptized by him ver 7 8 9 10 11 12. He taketh notice v. 13. that Christ took this opportunity for his comming unto John to be baptized of him THEN cometh Jesus from Galilee to Jordan unto John to be baptized of him THEN viz. when and whilst those who repaired unto John's baptism were in greatest numbers about him and attending on his Doctrine Sect. 194. The reason or occasion now assign'd of Christs delaying his Baptism until the time when he accepted it hath as we have shewed a ground in the Scriptures whereas that pretended by Mr. A. viz. His coming now forth to profess and publish the Gospel in the world hath neither word syllable nor iota here for it 3. And lastly whereas he saith in the argument before us That Christ was baptized in conformity to a Law of righteousness inculcating the expression of such a Law before and after over and over he should have done well and dealt clearly in his cause had he produced the Law of which he speaks so much and so oft or had directed us to those Scripture quarters where such a Law is to be found Certainly Christ was not baptized in conformity to that Law of Baptism which either is or was imposed upon others For this Law according to Mr. A's own notion and description of it as we have formerly seen requireth of all men to repent before they are baptized and further requireth of them to be baptized in order to the obtaining or receiving remission of sinnes whereas nothing can be more evident than that the Lord Christ was not baptized upon either of these accounts and therfore not in conformity to the common Law of Baptism which respecteth every other man * Lex Mosis de hoc Baptismâ— nihil praescripserat coeleste mandatum quod Baptista accâ—perat ad peccatâ—res resipiscentes proprie pertinebat Hugo Grot. in Mat. 3. 15. If he was baptized in conformity to any Law of righteousness it was some or other of these general Lawâ— which respect not Baptism more then many things besides nor yet other men more then the Lord Christ himself as man â—et all things be done to edification a 1 Cor. 14. 26. Let all things be done decently b ver 40. Whatsoever things are true whatsoever things are honest whatsoever things are just whatsoever things are pure whatsoever things are lovely whatsoever things are of good report and if there be any vertue if there be any praise think on these things c Philip. 4. 8. And it is the sence of our best Expositors that when Christ saith For thus it becometh
173. Administred by un-baptized a nullity 143. To be taken up for future repentance 186. Asign to children 191 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth to wash as well by any other kind of washing as by dipping 47. Never used in the New Testament to signifie to dip 48. However it doth not signifie to un-dip 50 Baptizing Never expressed by the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which properly signifieth to dip 48. To baptize a business of Inferiour consequence compared with the preaching of the Gospel 123 124. The baptizing of many no argument of the success of the Gospel 152 153 Basil 75 Mr. Baxter 16 32 39 42 78 84 86 88 89 Beza 77 L. Brook 138 Bulinger 78 82 83 85 256 C Calvin p. 67 76 77 186 216 217 241 257 265 268 352 374 377 Children Their righâ— to Baptism 26. As capable of Baptism as they were of Circumcision 34 35. Baptized into Moses 37 38. Children of Gentile beleevers not inferiour to the children of the Jews 37. In the same capacity of holy things under the Gospel in which they were under the Law 196 197 c. 304. How in a capacity of ingaging to the practice of repentance 195 196 c. 384. How stand in need of Baptism 204. As capable of the benefit or the ends of Baptism as the ends of imposition of hands 307. 308. Why not capable of the Lords Table 338. How and why the children of God 360. Whether and how all children are capable of Baptism 363. Jews children involved in the rejection of their parents 36 37 Christ His Faith not of the same kind with the Faith of other beleevers 386 387. Whether baptized upon the account of his faith and what Faith 388 389 c. Whether consecrated himself to the service of the Gospel by Baptism Not baptized in conformity to the common Law or rule of baptizing 388 389. c. May be put on several waies 270 Church-membership a great priviledge to children under the Law 35. So under the Gospel also 36. No Levitical ceremony nor abolished by Châ—ist 42 43 Circumcâ—sion with all the burthen of the Mosaical Law atding it no yoke in comparison of Baptism as it is now obtruded 166. The end and use of it better serv'd by the the circumcising of children then of men 174 196 199 208 308. A sign or seal of no mans Faith 194 195. The use and end of it the same in substance with those of Baptism 187. Why the fierce Advocates of it so severely censured by the Apostle 102 103. The end of it 174. Ingaged to the practise of Repentance as well as Faith 194 195. The remaining of it in the flesh 289 290 c. The visibility of it not insisted upon by the Scriptures 290 c. Not profitable without keeping the Law 297. Not a seal of righteousnesse of Abrahams Faith onely 33 188 189 c. Intended primarily for children yet first administred unto men 112. Profited not upon the meer deed done 297 298 c. How it abolished from Christ 226. The Circumcision of men more spoken of in the old Testament then of câ—ildren and why 1â—9 c. The administration of iâ— unto inâ—â—nâ—s a paâ—â— of the wisdom and strength of the Law 309. Theâ—r sons of Infant Circumcision Evâ—nâ—eâ—ical 315 â—â—quired onâ—y a regâ—laâ— pâ—ssiveness in â—tâ— prâ—pâ—r suâ—jâ—ct 339. More edâ—â—ying in being administâ—ed unto children 345. The want of it why thrâ—atned with cutting â—ff 349. Though â—ot râ—ceived voluntarily ye profited afterwards 3â—1 Circumstance Diffâ—rent circumstaâ—ces may justified dâ—fferent actions 113. may suspend lawful yea in some caâ—es necessary actions 123 Conscience Reverence is due to the consciences of the Saints 172 Consent Subsequent and Antecedent 335 Conâ—equences from Scripture are Scripture 15 16. Tâ—â— mâ—re unablâ— or in â—xpert mâ—n are to raise conâ—equences regularly they must needs be so much the more ignorant of the mind of God in the Scriptures 112 c. Contra-Remonstrants magnifie tâ—eir opinions 10 Contraries One contrary â—emoved placeth not the other 184 Cyprian oft cited by Austin for Inâ—ant-bapâ—iâ—m 134. ciâ—ed 148 D Deodate 217 Dâ—â—piâ—g with garments or without very inconvenienâ— 56 57 64. Was the Devils ceremony 58 59 Dâ—natists 9. E 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Sâ—metimes used for ad unto 60. Sometimes for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in 65 66. Sometimes for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 because or for the sake of 247 Ex sometimes signifieth fâ—om 60 Errour is apt to propagate 89 90 Est us 265 Eugenius Pope 241 Eunomius 9 Eunuch Act. 8. not dipped 51 52 61 62 Examples of Christ and the Apostles do not bind universally 116 117. In what cases they bind 127 F Fact Meer matter of fact no meet pillar to build any mans Faith upon 116 117 Faith and Repentance dead works according to Mr. A. untill Baptism quickeneth them 221. Faith under the Law how differs from Faith under the Gospel 266. How it qualifieth for Baptism 391 c. It investeth men with the prerogative of Sonship 391 392 c. Mr. Fisher 34. acknâ—wledgeth the Jews doting on the Circumcising of their childâ—en 144. His hard hap 150. His misunderstanding Christs imposition of hands on the children 160. His daring assertions 162 163 166. His mistaken construction of Abrahams receiving Circumcision 188 189. His true interpretation of the verb substanâ—ive 193. His error that Baptism is no sign unto children 199 200. Knoweth better how to triumph then to conquer 166. Resisteth Mr. Tombs 361 G Godfathers Godmothers thâ—ir origiâ—al recorded in Church History not the original of Infant bapâ—ism 140 Grotius 217 265 268 Guaâ—ter 241 H Hands Laying on of hands a mean of receiving the Spirit not Baptism 329 330. Chilâ—ren why capable of laying on hands 339 Dr Holms 136 149 Mr Th. Hooker 53 Houshold and house commonly signifie children in an house aâ— well as others 131 I Jaylor and his house whether dipt when baptized 69 70 147 Idolatrous usage prohibited by God 59 Jews their zeal for their câ—ildren 45. yet never complained of their not being baptized 45 Imitating Christ and the Apostles in their arguing how necessary 320 321 322 Infant-baptism yeeldth all the real fruits of true Baptism 97 99. May be proved from the Scriptures to have been practised in the Apostles daies though not from the History of the Scriptures 115. Proved by many arguments that it was then practised 122. to p. 150. Asserted from the Apostles by more then two or three witnesses 138 139. If forborn by the Apostles it was neither out of their own private spirits nâ—r by any Scripture restraint 122 c. There may be other reasons now for it 124 125. The original of it not recordeâ— in any Church-history 149 141. No reason or likelyhood that it should be inâ—râ—duced into the Church contrary to the practisâ— of it in the Apostles daies 147. The first opposers of it both in former and latter times were wicked men and unsound in the Faith 142 143.
So that they who truely beleeve in case they delay their Baptism not having been already baptized until afterwards commit an error at least or an oversight herein But there was no such Law imposed by God upon that Faith which was in Christ otherwise he must be supposed to have committed an over-sight in that he offered not himself unto Baptism until many yeares after this Faith had been first resident in him Therefore his Faith and the Faith required of other persons are not essentially or specifically the same Whereas Mr. A. pleads the sameness of expressions or denominations to prove both Faiths to be specifically the same and that to beleeve Jesus Christ to be the Son of God is the Faith required of all other persons to render them capable of Baptism and that this Faith was in Christ I answer That the sameness of name expression or denomination doth not alwaies prove the identity or sameness I mean not the specifical sameness of the things expressed or denominated but sometimes an agreement onely between them in some generical property or consideration Their Faith who have power given them hereupon to become the Sons of God is called a beleeving on his name Joh. 1. 12. and their Faith also to whom Christ refused to commit himself is in like manner termed a beleeving on his name Joh. 2. 23 24. Yet these two Faiths were of very different natures and considerations as sufficiently appears by the two passages compared notwithstanding their consent in name So again their Faith who because the Pharisees did not confess him lest they should be cast out of the synagogue and who loved the praise of men more than the praise of God is termed a beleeving 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 on him i. e. on Christ Joh. 12. 42 43. and their Faith also who beleeve to justification and salvation is expressed after the same manner a beleeving on him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Joh. 3. 16. and elswhere So again that act or series of actings by which the Saints testifie their approbation of the wisdom of God whether in the Gospel or in his providential actings is termed a justification Mat. 11. 19. as well as that act of God by which he absolveth or dischargeth sinners from the guilt of their sins upon their beleeving in Jesus Christ Rom. 5. 1 and in twenty places besides yet are these two acts of very different natures and specifically at least distinct the one from the other It were easie to levy many other instances upon the same account but these are abundantly sufficient to prove that the Faith of Christ beleeving himself to be the Son of God and the Faith of other men beleeving him to be the Son of God also are not by their agreement in name or expression evinced to be Faiths of the same consideration or kind Sect. 185. Suppose it were granted that the belief which was in Christ of his being the Son of God and the belief of the same truth in other persons were of the same nature and kind yet neither will it follow from hence that Christ was baptized upon the account of this Faith because all other persons are For 1. Other persons are not baptized simply directly or immediately upon the account of this Faith but by the interceding of their profession hereof before those who are to baptize them Whereas Christ made no profession unto Jon of that Faith by which he beleeved himself to be the Son of God neither was it proper or comly for him so to doe From whence by the way this saying of Mr. A. a little after therefore may it well be said indeed that Christ received Baptism upon the same terms as others did is manifestly evicted of untruth unless he think to salve the dishonour by those words at least in several respects of which salvage notwithstanding he bereaves himself by these words following and that in conformity to the same standing Law of righteousnesse to wit the Institution of God common to others as well as to him For doubtless there neither was nor is any such standing Law of righteousnesse nor Institution of God according to which any other person of mankind should be baptized upon the account of his Faith without any profession or declaration made of it unto the Baptizer Therefore Christ being baptized upon these terms was not baptized in conformity to the same standing Law of Righteousness or Institution of God common to others but by a Law in this respect appropriate to himself Sect. 186. 2. If John baptized Christ upon the account of his Faith whereby he beleeved himself to be the Son of God then when at first he refused or declined the baptizing of him Mat. 3. 14. either he was ignorant that such a Faith was in Christ or that this Faith was a legitimate ground of baptizing him or else it must be supposed that when â—e refused to baptize him he did against his conscience and contrary to what he knew his duty to be But all these are unworthy of John and not to be conceived of him Therefore hee did not baptize him upon the account of his Faith 3. If he did baptize him upon the account of his Faith then before his baptizing him he must be conceived to have reasoned thus within himself This man or this person surely beleeves himself to be the Son of God and since I have a compent or sufficient ground to conceive this of him viz. that he thus beleeveth therefore I will baptize him But it is loudly dissonant from all that reason saith to imagine that John reasoned after any such manner as this to strengthen his hand to the Baptizing of Christ Therefore he did not baptize him upon the account of his beleeving himself to be the Son of God The major in this argument shineth sufficiently with its own light The minor is evident from hence viz. because John knew as wel before his prohibiting him his baptism or refusing to baptize him that he beleeved himself to be the Son of God as afterwards when he yeelded to baptize him and yet as we see refused to baptize him notwithstanding the knowledg he had of such a belief in him Therefore certainly he did not baptize him upon the account of his Faith Nor did Christ in the interim I mean between John's refusing to baptize him and his admitting him unto his Baptism any wayes inform John that since he beleeved himself to be the Son of God he lawfully might or of duty ought to baptize him So that on which side soever of the businesse we look there is not so much as the least lineament of a face of probability that Christ was baptized upon the account of his beleeving himself to be the Son of God Sect. 187. If it be objected that John when he refused to admit Christ to hiâ— Baptism did as well know that he was the Son of God as that he beleeved himself to be Son of God and yet did not