but only one and once suffered Indeed it is said of the other seal as oft as ye do this 1 Cor. 11. 26. but not one word in Scripture can be found for more then once baptizing but the Apostle mentioning baptism joins it with things incapable of multiplication or pluralitie one Spirit one body of Christ the Church one hope of our calling metonymically put for the thing hoped for that is eternal life which is essentially but one one Lord one Faith that is one doctrine of faith Gal. 1. 6 7 8. Iud. 3 or objectively one truth of God one Christ shewing that there ought to be no more baptisms then faiths Christs or Gods if therefore said Optatus you give another baptism give another faith if ye give another faith give another Christ if ye give another Christ give also another God c. You see to what damnable absurdities rebaptizing drives unto That whereby men crucifie to themselves the Son of God afresh and put him to open shame may by no means be done But to rebaptize or to be willingly rebaptized in the Apostles sense is to crucifie to themselves the Son of God afresh and to put him to open shame therefore it may by no means be done This point the Apostle layeth down Heb. 6. 4 5 6. It is impossible for those who were once enlightned saith our Translation 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 who have been once baptized saith the Syriac to renew them again to repentance c. that is baptismal repentance the baptism of repentance as it is called Act 19. 4. and so Heb. 10. 12. Call to remembrance the former dayes in which after ye were illuminated Gre. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which the Syriac the best and nearest Interpreter of the New Testament rendreth in which ye were baptized So the Greeks were wont to call baptism 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 illumination possibly because persons converting from darkness of Idolatry were ordinarily enlightned by being taught the doctrine of the Gospel see Mat. 4. 16. Luk. 2. 32. Act. 26. 18. so the Hebrew 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in one signification importing taught is rendred by the LXX illuminated or also in respect of extraordinary gifts of the holy Ghost in the knowledge of the mysteries of the Gospel and unstudied tongues with other admirable enlargments of heart then flourishing in the Church Now those who are described v. 4 5. who have been once baptized and have tasted of the heavenly gift and were made partakers of the holy Ghost and have tasted the good Word of God and the powers of the world to come if they shall fall away saith our Translation Gre. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and falling away which and the Syriac omittetâ—â— rendring the sense as others also non possunt iterum peccare ut denuò renoventur ad resipiscentiam denuò crucifigant c. they cannot so sin that is unto death that they should again be renewed to repentance and crucifie afresh c. that is in a second baptism where note by the way that this place of Scripture so much wrested by the enemies of truth against the comfortable doctrine of the Saints perseverance maketh mainly for it for the Apostle saith not that those who are described v. 4 5. do or may fall away but that it is impossible isto supposito to be renewed because in such a supposition the merit of Christs Cross being abolished and made void by which they were renewed it must needs follow that so Christ should be crucified afresh and be put to open shame that they might be renewed by a second and new merit of his Cross which seeing it is impossible to be the Apostle will inferr that it is impossible that these here described v. 4 5. should finally fall away The foundation of the Lord remaining sure and having this seal The Lord knoweth who are his whose prescience cannot possibly be deceived in electing any who shall fall away But to return to our purpose the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to themselves is very considerable The Son of God they cannot now possibly crucifie afresh nor put him again to open shame who sitteth at the right hand of the glory of the Father had they the malice of the Jews and power of the Romans who once crucified him to help them yet in iterating on themselves baptism the sign of their implantation into the similitude of his death they crucifie to themselves that is as much as in them is the Son of God Chrysostome excellently expresseth it Baptism saith he is the Cross for therein our old man is crucified with him Again we have been planted together in the likeness of his death as therefore Christ may not be crucified again for that were to put him again to open shame so neither may we be baptized again for if death have no more dominion over him if he be risen in his resurrection a conqueror over death c. and should again be crucified then all these things were meer fables and mockeries therefore he that rebaptizeth himself doth again crucifie him But what is crucifying again As Christ died on the Cross so do we in baptism not in the flesh but to sin therefore there may be no second washing for if there be there may be a third and a fourth for the first is made void by the second and that by another even to an infinite Where there are all the essential parts of baptism rightly administred according to the commission given by Christ to his Apostles there baptism cannot be made void or no true baptism by any thing accidental circumstantial or less then essential neither expresly nor by any necessary consequence any where in holy Scripture forbidden But in baptizing of Infants of Church-priviledged Parents by sprinkling or washing with water in the name of the Father and the Son and the holy Ghost there are all the essential parts of baptism according to Christs commission given to the Apostles to wit the Element and the Word which constitute the Sacrament Therefore that their baptism is not neither can be made void or no true baptism by or in respect of Infant-age or of only washing or sprinkling them with water which are things circumstantial accidental less then essential and no where expresly or by necessary consequence forbidden in holy Scripture So that whatever Anabaptists pretend in their eager pursuit of their opinion that they do not rebaptize supposing that there preceded no essential or true baptism in regard of the persons being baptized in their Infancie or because they fancie dipping the whole body to be essential to baptism and so necessary that without it they think there can be no true baptism neither of which have any ground in Scripture and whereas Christ is the Saviour of every age sex and condition therefore male and female aged and Infants have right to the seal as hath been shewed it highly concerneth them seriously to
admitted to the Lords Supper But in this agument there is a Sophisma â—lenchi for first it wants the condition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 if we follow your sense concerning spirituall infants taking infants for spirituall or reâ—enerate persons in the major and for those who are literally infants in the minor and it wanteth also 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 There is no question but that baptized infants have right to the holy CoÌ„munion as they have to strong meat but not a capacity as such or while they are infants and God hath in express terms restrained the Lords supper to those who can actually apprehend remember declare forth Christs death 1 Cor. 11. 26. which because infants cannot do we give them not the Communion Secondly God hath denounced a grievous curse or punishment against any that shall preâ—ume without due examination of himself to eat of that bread drink of that cup but not so concerning Baptism it being the seal of our new-birth and reception into the visible Church and Covenant which hatâ— no such condition annexed as may justly exclude Infants in respect of any present non-performance thereof But the Lords Supper is the Seal of our growth in grace and spirituall strength instituted for the confirmation of our admittance into and our continuance in the Church of Christ whose death and passion for our redemption we thereby shew forth and commemorate for our spirituall perfection nourishment and strengthening in faith and other graces of his Spirit for our assurance that God having once received us into his favour will continue his mercy to us in Christ By these disparities the invalidity of the Pleaders Argument may appear And if it were true which he further saith that the wit of man is not able to shew a disparity in the sanction c. yet the wisdom of God is able and hath declared this difference in holy Scripture and the same can shew more then the wit of man can discern and hath shewed more then the learned Pleader doth or will understand who I conceive doth not yet know all that the wit of man or all the world can inform him of but is it not better even for those who have been in the Mount with God to cast the veil of modest humility over those excellencies which they have received and with which they shine to others admiration then to ostent them to the contempt of others The Apostle of Christ was rap't up into the third Heaven and yet professed we know in part and we prophesie in part 1 Cor. 13. 9. But you further say Since the ancient Church did with an equall opinion of necessity give them the Communion c. That which you said a little before They are as honest and as reasonable that doe neither to wit baptize infants or give them the Comunion as those that understood the Obligation to be Parallel we may very well believe and wish that either of them may prove honest hereafter But to that which you say That the ancient Church did with an equall opinion of necessity give them the Communion I answer 1. with Tertullian That is of the Lord and true which was first delivered but that is extraneous and false which is afterward received in And with Cyprian We ought not to heed what some before us have thought was to be donâ— but what Christ did who was before all for we ought not to follow the custom of men but the truth of God 2 Your own rule must binde you though it cannot others wâ—o consent not thereto they who reject tradition when 't is against them must not pretend it at all for them pag. 237. Numb 25. 3 It is considerable in that custome of the church as some other incoveniences which Augustine saith It is saith he one thing which we teach and another which we endure one thing which we are enjoyned to command and another thing which we are commanded to amend and untill we amend we are compelled to endure it And again who is eaten with the zeal of Gods house why he that endeavoureth and desireth to amend all that â—e sees amisse he resteth not if he cannot amend it he endureth it he sigh's the grain is not tossed out of the floor it endures the chaff that it may enter into the granary when the chaff is winnowed out 4 We adhere not so to tradition that we universally receive all that which was done or said of old things delivered by some but not generally received by the Church we esteem but superstructions of particular men or superseminations which possibly may spread farre as many pernicious opinions have done yet no sober man ever took them for Apostolicall or so much as Ecclesiasticall traditions we neither reject any tradition which appeareth to be Apostolicall if not peculiar to their times or suited peculiarly to certain times places or persons nor do we rashly receive any tradition for such except we are certain that the Scripture determineth nothing against it or where strong consequence from thence justifieth it 5 We conceive Augustines rule herein to be good In those things saith he concerning which divine Scripture determineth nothing certainly the custome of Gods people or institution of our ancestors are to be held for a law otherwise endlesse contention will arise also we must beware that the calm of charity be not clouded by the storm of contention 6 We will not rashly dissent from reverend antiquity wherein it dissenteth not from the truth we love peace with all who hold that in fundamentalls at least and therefore will follow Augustin's advice in that he piously saith concerning his reader where saith he he knows his errour let him return to me where mine let him recall me our rule being that of the Apostle 1 Cor. 11 1. be yee fâ—llowers of me even as I also am of Christ more no good man will require nor render lesse to Ancestors 7 Lastly we say that the Scripture which you cite Ioh. 6. 53. except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood you have no life in you is not spoken concerning a Sacramentall but a spirituall feeding and although some of the Iesuites and other Papists contend against us herein yet some of the most sober of them acknowledge that those words are not to be understood concerning eating or receiving the Lords super which ours generally maintain you might do your self right to joyn with us and not with the most eager Iesuites concerning the spirituall feeding of infants to eternall life by the merit of Christ applyed to them for their Union with him and salvation in and by him we willingly accord the manner of effecting by the secret power of the holy Ghost we enquire not after because it is not revealed but for the reasons alleaged we give them not the communion Next you say If Anabaptist shall be a name of disgrace why shall not some
baptism but persons of years which is the question in hand and therfore may not be a medium to prove your assertion by as for asking them questions to be answered by Sponsors Godfathers and Godmothers we shall speak anon And to supply their incapacity by the answer of a Godfather is but the same unreasonableness acted with a worse circumstance and there is no sensible account to be given of it We say that by your present confession such sponsion by God-fathers is but a circumstance therefore the sponsors supply not any incapacity of infants in the respect of the substance of baptism which is to be sprinkled washed with or dipped in water in the name of the Father the Son and the holy Ghost for this their own capacity is sufficient they being born of believing parents and within the Church without the supply of any answer of others for them which if you grant us we have the end of our dispute as for circumstances neither commanded nor forbidden by God in the holy scriptures we shall willingly submit to the authority and practice of the Church in which we live If you dispute from the circumstance or any pretended inconvenience therein to the anulling the substance controverted you know how unreasonable that fallacia accidentis is and what sensible account can be given of it But you say That which some imperfectly murmur concerning stipulations civil performed by Tutors in the name of their Pupils is an absolute vanity c. Have a care that you be not answered with à turpe est Doctori c. Do you not vainly argue that in the use of God-fathers c. God is tyed and Christian Religion transacts her mysteries by proportion and compliance with the Law of the Romans concerning which something hath been answered before I only add here that God neither commanding nor forbidding God-fathers it is no vanity to obey authority herein But to disturb the peace of the Church and make schismes for things in their own nature indifferent and commended to us by venerable antiquity is not only vain but impious And how is God tyed where he neither forbids nor commands To the rest we say not that Christian Religion must transact her mysteries by complyance with Roman Laws or humane customs but that in some things she may in things circumstantial and no waies repugnant to the word of God You say further I know God might if he would have appointed God-fathers to gâ—ve answer in behalf of children and to be fideiussors for them but we cannot find any authority or ground that he hath and if he had then it is to be supposed he would have given them commission to have transacted the solemnity with better circumstances and given answers with more truth We answer 1. In that you can find no authority or ground for it nor against it as we know it can be no other then adiaphorous or indifferent and in or for such things as are meerly circumstantial and in their own nature indifferent to dissent from antiquity disobey the Churches authority and break the sacred band of unity let your own consciences tell you what you do 2. Whereas you would bespatter this custom of imputation of will-worship and untruth in the users thereof I say first That whatsoever God hath commanded or forbidden in holy Scriptures that is necessarily to be observed and this faithfull word we must hold fast Tit. 1. 9. But those things which he hath neither commanded nor forbidden neither expresly nor by necessary consequence fall under the general rule belonging to things arbitrary and indifferent Let all things be done decently and in order â— Cor. 14 4â— which then only can be when we unanimously and uniformly do that which a general consent and constant practice of the Church warranteth not that which every private spirit liketh or disliketh There can be no decency without order nor order in confusion of practices therefore God having left many things circumstantial arbitrary as to the authority of the Church we ought to tender her unity and reverence her authority the contempt whereof hath opened so wide a dore to schism as now troubleth the Christian world Secondly there may be falshood in some mens answers though no fault in the order which God will it being his perfection that he is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 God that cannot lie Tit. 1. 2. and it is the inviolable holyness of his will that he will not neither can will any evil and it is certainly true which Fulgentius saith As there is no sin in him so there is no sin of him For the question you say is asked of believing in the present and if the God-fathers answer in the name of the child I do believe it is notorious that they speak false and ridiculously for the infant is not capable of believing c. For answer we may say with Augustin Who knows not that to be baptized is in or for infants instead of believing And again they are borne to Church and although they cannot run thither on their own feet yet go they on others feet that they may be healed our mother the Church lendeth them others feet that they may come others heart that they may believe others tongue that they may confess that for as much as in that they are sick they are more grievously burthened with anothers sin that is which they acted not in their own persons so when these are cured they may be healed or saved another confessing for them But I demand Why may we not here with better reason understand present for future believing then you do children of believersâ— holyness which the Apostle 1 Cor. 7. 14. pronounceth in the present by a designation to the service of Iesus Christ and the future participation of the promises But Augustin saith very well If the Sacraments had not a certain similitude of those things whereof they are Sacraments they should not at all be Sacraments but by reason of this likeness they oftentimes receive the very names of these things themselves therefore as after a certain manner the Sacrament of Christs body is the body of Christ the Sacrament of Christs blood is the blood of Christ so the Sacrament of faith is faith Now to believe is nothing else but to have faith and so when 't is answered that the infant believeth who hath not yet the affection of faith we answer that the hath faith in respect of the sacrament of faith and that he converteth to God in respect of the sacrament of conversion because even that very answer appertaineth unto the celebration of the Sacrament as the Apostle speaketh of baptism it self We are saith he Buried with him by baptism into death he saith not we signifie burial but altogether saith We are buried therefore he called the Sacrament of so great a matter by no other name then of the thing it self So that faith though it be not yet such as
is considerable either as it is in or of the subject 1. A previous disposition in the subject we may understand eitheâ— as a self-disposing by some intrinsecal and inward faculty or as a being extrinsecally disposed and fitted by some other power to a capacity or receptibility of something which yet it hath not neither was capable thereof before such a disposition Now this in our present instance presupposeth or speaks some change of the mind by illumination faith remorse of conscience purpose of leading a new life and desire to be implanted into Christ and the communion of Saints by baptism and so it is internal or professing of that endeavour of knowing the mysteries of the Gospel saith and repentance testified before men and so these dispositions are external or expressed to men whom it may concern these are necessary in persons of years coming to baptism 2. there is a previous disposition of the subject without any present change of the mind which springeth from his relation to some other or some others act So some titles of honour come on children in their fathers Charters without any present change of the childs mind so Lands and Inheritances by right of adoption may be setled on them in their infancy without their present change or knowledg so also the believing parents priviledg and being within Gods Covenant made with them and their children previously disposeth infants to the seal thereof to wit by giving them a certain right thereto and so was it in circumcision But if a Proselyte were to receive the seal of the Covenant he must necessarily be prepared and first disposed thereto by the knowledg of Gods Law and Covenant faith repentance or at least the profession thereof and those other rites which the Law required on that behalf The infants previous disposition to circumcision was no other then his fathers and his own priviledg and being within Gods Covenant Of the child was neither faith nor repenâ—ance required for the present but future so must we understand concerning baptism the seal of faith under the Gospel And not say you to instance in those innumerable places that require faith before this Sacrament there needs no more but this one He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved I answer 1. Deal fairly dispute ad idem and shew me one place of Scripture which universally requireth faith before this Sacrament and you shall be excused for the innumerable places which you speak of We can shew that the rule holds not universally that faith must precede the Sacraments for though Abrahams faith preceded the seal thereof yet Isaaks seal preceded his faith Mr. Calvin expresseth the reason hereof Why saith he doth in Abraham the Sacrament follow faith and in Isaak his son it goeth before all understanding because it is meet that he which being in full-grown age is received into fellowship of the Covenant from which he had hitherto been a stranger should first learn the conditions thereof but an infant begotten of him needed not so which by right of inheritance according to the form of the promise is even from his mothers womb contained in the Covenant And certainly in this respect God calleth the infants of covenanted parents sons and daughters born unto him Ezek 16. 20. 23. 37. be esteeming them his children who are born of those parents to whom God made the promise to be a God unto them and their seed after them which promise as truly concerns us and our children as it concerned Abraham and his 2. If the argument be good from that place Mark 16. 16. He that believeth and is baptized faith is first named and then baptism ergo faith must precede baptism Why shall not the Argument from other places be good to the contrary as Iohn 3 5. Except a man be born of water and of the spirit he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God Baptism is first named and then regeneration therefore baptism must precede regeneration So again Ephes. 5. 26. Washing with water that is baptism is mentioned before the word ergo we must first be baptized and afterward receive the word 3. If this argument were good how many men and women of age must by the same reason be denyed baptism For all have not faith but the truth is that to be born in the Church is unto or in infants instead of profession of faith and repentance as to the outward seal for which we contend and profession of faith and repentance is to and for the adult instead of the same for their right to the desired seal so was it to Ismael and Esau whom God hated because they were born of covenanted parents 4. Sure it is that Christ in the forementioned place speaketh of men and women of years For you confess that infants as such cannot believe and what then must follow if your cruel principles were true Christ saith But he that believeth not shall be damned If this were as you would have it spoken concerning infants also what should become of all those that die in their infancy what are they damn'd Here appears an inexcusable perversness of these men who when children are proposed to their interest in general terms granted them there they would exclude them except they shew a particular warrant and baptize all Nations without a baptize infants shall not advantage them for the seal of their admission into Christs visible Church But where a general rule is mentioned from whence they are in reason and all charitable construction to be exempted there it must include them for their disadvantage even to damnation without any particular warrant for such inteterpretation Mr. Cobbet observeth well That the Covenant-priviledges of grace are ever to be expounded in favour of the principal or less principal counterparties unless any exception be made of persons or priviledges by him which was the Covenant-maker To avoid this you must either acknowledg that the place you cite is either to be understood of those of years who contumaciously reject the Ordinances of God being hardned in wilfull blindness and unbelief and so that it doth not concern children as such or else you must allow infants some secret seeds of faith and regeneration and so you shall justly acknowledg their capacity of baptism Plainly you say thus faith and baptism in conjunction will bring a man to heaven but if he have not faith baptism shall do him no good True in those who though baptized as Simon Magus are yet but in the gall of bitterness but this is a meer ignoratio elenchi hence to conclude against infants baptism our question not being whether all that are baptized shall be saved but whether children of believing parents ought to be baptized which if you would thus disprove whosoever have not a saâ—ing faith that the Sacrament may do them good may not be baptized but children have not such faith that baptism received may doe them good ergo children are not
blind see the Sun what can you gain hereby it may be and certainly is that the Gospels light is hid to some the Apostle will tell you to whom and why 2 Cor. 4. 3 4. It is hid to them that are lost in whom the God of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not lest the light of the glorious Gospel of Christ should shine unto them we undertake not to make the truth evident to every gain-sayer and despiser thereof but say of such an one as Elisha for his servant at the beleaguered Dothan 2 King 6. 17. Lord I pray thee open his eyes that he may see The most manifest light of the Gospel had not evidence enough with the Pharisees whom Christ pronounced blind and it concerned them chiefly which he said they have winked with their eyes c. an unbeliever may doubt of any truth and then it is not evident to him The old Academicks were wont to question the testimonie and evidence of their own senses with a quid si falleris being not confident of the truth of that they saw with their eyes and heard with their ears Carneades doubted of all things yet certainly many things were evident of themselves to those who could and would see and know manifest truths though not to him 4. They who deny convincing evidence in Gods Word not only erre not knowing the Scriptures but tacitely accuse the Wisdom and Providence of God for mans salvation of insufficiencie for how shall matters of controversie concerning faith and manners he decided without sufficient evidence and if you think there is not sufficient evidence in Scripture to keep us from errour and to direct us in the way of truth and salvation in what other rule or testimonie will you place such evidence as you would have what in Traditions and unwritten verities where shall we seek these among our adversaries nay but no man can be edified by that which is destructive or in Enthusiasms and Revelations but what evidence can there be in those things whose authority cannot be proved and whose truth cannot be infallible nothing less then that which cannot be false can be the ground of faith and religion whatsoever falleth below that supreme certaintie is but opinion at most Now the Word of God only is infallible because he cannot lye Tit. 1. 2. and therefore his Word is profitable for doctrine for reproof for correction for instruction in righteousness that the man of God may be perfect throughly furnished unto all good works 2 Tim. 3. 16 17. 5 If it be rejoined that in our present question and some other cases the Scripture saith nothing expresly and positively to evidence the truth I answer I with Tertullian I am confident to say that the Scriptures themselves were so disposed by the will of God that they might administer matter to Hereticks seeing that I read there must be Heresies which could not be without Scriptures 2 That is Scripture truth which the Scripture proposeth or enjoineth by necessary consequence though not in express words and whosoever disbelieveth or disobeyethâ— that so far he rejecteth the Scripture in his errour and ignorance of Scripture So the Sadduces denyed the resurrection of the dead among other vain arguments so principally a non scripto because Moses whose writings only they received did not in terminis or express words and syllables say the dead shall rise again now though that is true Moses did not expresly say so yet our Saviour told them that therein they erred not knowing the Scriptures Mat. 22. 29. where he meaneth not express words of Scripture but necessary consequence for certainly they knew the express letter yet thought they had not evidence enough from Scripture because they found nothing there in terminis against their errour which Christ yet justly chargeth on them Ye do erre not knowing the Scriptures as touching the resurrection of the dead have you not read that which was spoken unto you by God saying I am the God of Abraham and the God of Isaac and the God of Iacob Well what express Scripture is here to prove the resurrection of the dead that Christ should charge those that denyed the same with errour and ignorance of Scriptures Truly no more then we find for Infant-baptism in appearance much less yet thus he who could not be deceived chargeth them because denying necessary consequence they required express words now the consequence was thus God is not the God of the dead but of the living therefore the dead shall rise again To the folding up of all I might repeat sundry things which as necessarily conclude our Infant-baptism as Infants circumcision into the same faith Gods Covenant with Abraham and his spiritual seed that is all Beleevers Christs honouring Infants with sacred embraces proposing them as heirs and patterns designed for the Kingdome of heaven the extent of Gods federal promise to us and our children childrens capacitie of the inward baptism signified in the external sign whole Families and Nations baptized of which children are and ever were a great part Christs absolute command to baptize all Nations without any tittle of exception to Infants Infants-federal and ecclesiastical holiness by their parents and their own right But that I would not be irksom to the prudent and pious Reader to whom I heartily wish a right understanding in all things constancie in the truth and unitie of the holy Spirit that we may all meet in Gods eternal kingdom of glory AMEN A SURVEY OF The Controverted Points CONCERNING INFANT-BAPTISM c. THE SECOND PART CHAP. I. Infants of Christian Parents ought to be baptized I Need not be long in describing this Sacrament only I say that Baptism is a Sacrament of the New Testament succeeding Circumcision the Seal of the Old appointed by Christ for our Inlet into his Church our implantation into Him and the similitude of his death and resurrection in which the water sanctified by the word representeth the blood of Christ sealeth and exhibiteth to the Elect all the benefits of his inestimable merits death passion and resurrection to our regeneration remission of sins and cleansing our bodies and souls from them all though not presently so that we have no sin yet so as that believing in Christ we have no guilt of original or actual sin imputed to us to condemnation for the water by the Ordinance of God touching the body the Spirit of Jesus baptizeth body and soul. Hence Baptism is said to save us 1 Pet. 3. 21. the end of Baptism is that being baptized we might be illuminated being illuminated we might be adopted sons of God being adopted we might be perfected that we may become immortally blessed In our being baptized in the Name of the Father the Son and the Holy Ghost we do as it were by a solemn Oath or Covenant declare and